Index › Vendors › Sight AI · September 2026 Edition

1 category · Named, not ranked

Sight AI

10Judge labels

3First choices

0Negative labels

4 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-09-16.3, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

3 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. Sight AI was named 3 times in SEO, where Surfer SEO led with 25%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business10 of 103

under the label threshold

Mid-market13 of 113

under the label threshold

Enterprise17 of 74

under the label threshold

In seo · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading

Standing by category

Every category where a model named Sight AI for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
SEO and content optimization platforms	Marketing	2%	13 of 113	0%	3	under 10 labels · led by Surfer SEO at 25%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Sight AI yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Sight AI across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	1	1	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	0
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	0	0	0
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	0	0
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct5 labels2

Paraphrase3 labels1

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained0 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative0 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative10 labels in all, every segment counted; 3 of the 3 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Sight AI is the strongest choice in 2026, as it's the only platform that combines content generation with AI visibility monitoring in a single product” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SEO · direct prompt · first choice

“Sight AI combines traditional SEO content generation with AI visibility tracking” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SEO · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Sight AI, over the 10 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Sight AI was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Surfer SEO6 of 101Not in the top three

MarketMuse5 of 101Not in the top three

Ahrefs5 of 100Not in the top three

Clearscope5 of 100Not in the top three

Semrush2 of 101Not in the top three

Botify2 of 100Not in the top three

BrightEdge2 of 100Not in the top three

Conductor2 of 100Not in the top three

Frase2 of 100Not in the top three

Google Search Console2 of 100Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Sight AI. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 6 of the 10 answers that named Sight AI and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

trysight.ai6

breakingb2b.com3

cuttingedgepr.com2

newmedia.com2

onely.com2

thedigitalelevator.com2

viciousmarketing.net2

yesoptimist.com2

aeoengine.ai1

airops.com1

No domain is on file for Sight AI, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

breakingb2b.com/blog/b2b-seo-tools3

trysight.ai/blog/b2b-content-generation-platform3

cuttingedgepr.com/articles/6-best-b2b-saas-seo-agencies-in-2026-a-brief-overview2

onely.com/blog/best-b2b-seo-agencies2

thedigitalelevator.com/blog/best-b2b-seo-companies2

trysight.ai/blog/b2b-ai-seo-software2

viciousmarketing.net/post/enterprise-seo-platform-comparison2

aeoengine.ai/blog/best-saas-seo-tools1

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

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 Sight AI'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 Sight AI, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at the vendor's own domain is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.