Industry benchmarks for AI Visibility: per-vertical baselines

Industry benchmarks for AI Visibility (the typical 10-Point Framework score range for brands in a given vertical) give buyers a reference point for evaluating their own brand. Knowing your brand scored 55/100 is meaningful only relative to whether the typical brand in your category scored 40, 55, or 70. This guide documents the cross-vertical benchmarks as of August 2026, derived from our 20+ brand audit portfolio across 12 months of cross-client work plus integration with external research from Ahrefs' December 2025 study of 75,000 brands and other published AI search analytics. The benchmarks should be treated as directional reference rather than statistical absolutes (the audit portfolio is small relative to enterprise-scale industry surveys), but the directional patterns are reproducible and useful for buyer-side decision-making. We publish benchmarks annually in the State of AI Visibility Index with updates in quarterly drift reports.

What does an industry benchmark measure?

An industry benchmark measures five things for each vertical: the median score, the top quartile threshold, the top decile threshold, the typical pattern on each dimension and the most common gaps.

Median score. The midpoint of brand scores observed in the vertical. Half of brands score above, half below.

Top quartile threshold. The score above which the top quarter of brands cluster. Brands at this threshold are competitive but not category-leading.

Top decile threshold. The score above which the top tenth of brands cluster. Brands at this threshold are top-of-category for AI Visibility.

Per-dimension typical pattern. For each of the 10 dimensions in the 10-Point Framework, the typical score range for brands in the vertical.

Common gap patterns. Which dimensions brands in the vertical most commonly score low on.

The benchmarks, which reflect our own audits as of August 2026 and are published in the State of AI Visibility Index, provide buyers a calibrated reference: "is my brand's 55/100 above or below the typical vertical performance?"

What are the 2026 cross-vertical baseline benchmarks?

In our audit portfolio as of August 2026, scored with the 10-Point AI Citation Audit, the cross-vertical median composite is roughly 45-55/100 (Grade D+ to C). Most brands across most verticals haven't invested systematically in AEO. Median scores are pulled down by:

• Missing Pattern A2 directories (Check 3 typical score: 4-5)
• Weak schema markup (Check 4 typical score: 4-5)
• No declared author entity on editorial content (Check 5 component)
• NAP inconsistencies (Check 6 typical score: 5-6)
• No original data publication (Check 7 typical score: 3-4)

In the same August 2026 portfolio data, reported in the State of AI Visibility Index, brands scoring 70+/100 are in the top quartile across verticals. Brands scoring 80+/100 are in the top decile.

What are the per-vertical benchmarks?

The per-vertical benchmarks vary by category, with the lowest median composite among insurance brokers and the highest in mid-market B2B SaaS. Each row below gives the median, the top quartile threshold, the top decile threshold and the gap we see most often in that vertical.

Source: Data for AI Search audit portfolio, August 2026, scored with the 10-Point AI Citation Audit. Directional figures from a small portfolio, not a statistical survey.

What do the benchmarks tell us about competitive dynamics?

The benchmarks show three cross-vertical patterns: under-engineered verticals offer asymmetric opportunity, mature verticals compete on methodology depth, and local services verticals reward systematic execution.

Pattern 1: Under-engineered verticals offer asymmetric opportunity. Verticals with low median composite scores (CPAs at 38-42, insurance brokers at 35-40) are systematically under-engineered. Brands that engineer to top-decile (~70-72 score) significantly outperform competitor citation rate. First-mover advantage is real and durable.

Pattern 2: Mature verticals require methodology depth to compete. Verticals with higher median composite (B2B SaaS at 55-60) have brands competing on methodology depth. Top-decile brands aren't winning on basic Pattern A2 directory presence (everyone has it) but on per-platform optimization and original data publication.

Pattern 3: Local services verticals reward systematic execution. Painting contractors, restoration, HVAC, plumbing: median scores cluster 40-55. Top-decile (~75-80) requires systematic execution across all 10 dimensions but the playbook is well-documented. The bottleneck is execution, not strategy.

How should buyers interpret these benchmarks?

Buyers should read the benchmarks in five steps, starting with their own score and ending with the direction competitors are moving.

Step 1: Score your own brand. Run the 10-Point Framework audit. Document your composite score and per-dimension breakdown.

Step 2: Compare to your vertical's median. Above median, you're outperforming typical brands in your category. Below median, you're underperforming typical brands.

Step 3: Compare to your vertical's top quartile and top decile. Above top quartile (65-72 depending on vertical), you're competitive. Above top decile (75-82), you're category-leading.

Step 4: Compare per-dimension. Even brands above the composite median may have specific dimensions where they're below typical. The per-dimension pattern shows where to invest.

Step 5: Estimate competitive position trajectory. Are competitors investing in AEO? If yes, expect benchmarks to rise; your score needs to rise faster than the benchmark to maintain position. If no, your AEO investment buys durable advantage.

How will benchmarks change over time?

Benchmarks will rise over time, and two forces shape the trajectory: industry-wide AEO investment and changes to the scoring methodology.

Force 1: Industry-wide AEO investment. As more brands invest in AEO, median benchmarks rise, a movement the quarterly drift reports are designed to track. The brand scoring 50/100 today may be median; the brand scoring 50/100 in 2027 may be below median.

Force 2: Methodology evolution. As we update the 10-Point Framework (v0.2 → v0.3 in March 2026), absolute scores may shift. Methodology version is noted on each benchmark.

The quarterly drift reports track benchmark evolution between annual Index publications. Our estimate is that typical median scores rise 5-10 points over each 12-month period as industry-wide AEO investment compounds.

Frequently asked questions

How statistically rigorous are these benchmarks?

Directional, not statistically definitive. 20+ brands across 12 verticals is small for statistical inference. The benchmarks are useful for relative positioning, not for tight confidence intervals around the absolute scores.

Why aren't there benchmarks for X vertical?

The 2026 baseline covers 12 verticals. Verticals not covered haven't accumulated enough audit data yet. As the audit portfolio expands, additional verticals will get benchmark coverage in subsequent Index publications.

What if my brand scored below median?

That's the typical starting point. Most brands haven't invested in AEO. Run the remediation playbook (Pattern A2 directories, schema rollout, NAP cleanup, brand mention engineering) and re-audit after 90 days. Expected lift: 15-25 points for most brands starting below median.

What if my brand scored above top decile?

You're in category-leading territory. Focus shifts from foundational AEO to compounding advantages (original data publication cadence, per-platform optimization depth, brand mention engineering scale). The investment changes from "catch up" to "extend lead."

How often do top-decile thresholds change?

Annually. Industry-wide AEO investment raises median and top-decile thresholds over time. The 2027 Index will likely show top-decile thresholds 5-10 points above 2026 baselines.

---

Companion guides: The 2026 State of AI Visibility Index · AI Citation Drift Report methodology · The 10-Point AI Citation Framework · Brand mention frequency: the #1 predictor.