[unCited]
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
[unCited]/Reply
ProductCitation IndexAI InfluenceBlogBook
Claim profile →

AEO Score

62

Growing Presence

Avg Prompt Score

71

across 883 prompts

AI Share of Voice

71%

across 865 prompts

Category Visibility

#8

in Sales Engagement · of 124

Critical Issues

4

critical + high

Per-stage performance

🔍Discovery
836 category
Cited78%652/836
Share of voice70%avg
Engine consensus45%of engines
Competitors6.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
⚖️Evaluation
10 brand-level
Cited80%8/10
Share of voice80%avg
Engine consensus—
Competitors0.3avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
🛡️Trust
5 brand-level
Cited80%4/5
Share of voice80%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.3avg/cited
Sentiment—no data
💰Conversion
5 brand-level
Cited100%5/5
Share of voice100%avg
Engine consensus100%of engines
Competitors1.0avg/cited
Sentiment—no data

Cited rate · share of voice · engine consensus · sentiment, broken out by buyer-journey stage. Sentiment is the net positive−negative skew across engines that cited the brand at this stage.

Categories Reply is visible in

6
  • AI SDRs1 of 82→
  • Sales Engagement8 of 124→
  • CRM14 of 158→
  • AI Agents15 of 145→
  • Email Marketing20 of 100→

Executive summary

Reply.io is highly likely to be cited for evaluation-stage prompts because it has strong G2 authority (1535 reviews, 4.6★, Leader badge) and publicly crawlable pricing. The biggest AI citation risk is comparison-query coverage: while Reply.io has competitor comparison content, there was no verifiable first-party “[Reply.io] vs Apollo.io/Outreach/lemlist/Salesloft” page structure surfaced in live search, so models may fall back to third-party sources for “How does Reply.io compare to …?” prompts.

Based on audit of reply.io · Apr 1, 2026

Built for The Citation Economy