| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI visibility and answer engine tracking tools | Marketing | 5% | 5 of 90 | 18% | 38 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Local listings management | Marketing | 0% | 45 of 65 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by BrightLocal at 33% |
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI visibility | 2% | 6% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 10 → 5 of 90 |
| Local listings | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 45 of 65, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.1 Fast | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“Tools using official APIs (e.g., Conductor, Semrush): More reliable, real-time data” Grok 4.1 Fast · AI visibility · negative prompt · first choice
“I'd recommend Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit if you want the best balance” Perplexity Sonar · AI visibility · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For a mid-sized B2B company, I'd recommend Semrush's AI Visibility Toolkit.” Grok 4.1 Fast · AI visibility · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“the best all-around choice is usually Semrush” Perplexity Sonar · AI visibility · direct prompt · first choice
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“Mid-market companies often struggle with "pay-per-keyword" pricing from massive enterprise suites (like Semrush/Ahrefs) which can get astronomically expensive” Qwen 3.7 Flash · AI visibility · scale prompt · soft negative
“Semrush describes its score as a benchmark based on topic coverage and mention consistency... it isn't the same thing as buyer exposure, clicks, or sales.” GPT-6 Luna · AI visibility · negative prompt · soft negative
“A 7 Jan 2026 check of "AI visibility checkers" tested SEMrush, AmIVisibleOnAI, and Neil Patel's Ubersuggest ... The results were described as shocking” Muse Glimmer 30B · AI visibility · negative prompt · soft negative
“Verdict: Caution. Good for monitoring general trends, but potentially overkill and costly for precise answer-engine attribution.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · AI visibility · negative prompt · soft negative
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 105 of the 109 answers that named Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit and are not a share of its labels.
305 of the 356 domain citations in answers naming Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit came from somebody else's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
Fetched September 14, 2026. These describe the company, not the product's standing, and a claimed page can dispute any of them. · Wikidata · LinkedIn · Crunchbase
What Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: agencies.semrush.com/seo-and-ai-visibility-by-ewa-solutions-gmbh, semrush.com/apps/ai-toolkit, semrush.com/features/ai-visibility, semrush.com/solutions/ai-visibility, semrush.com/free-tools/ai-search-visibility-checker. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Semrush AI Visibility Toolkit by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows: