The brand
Observations attributed to the subject using stated, verifiable criteria.
Share of voice
Compare how much people talk about you and competitors.
Measure your brand’s share of mentions against selected competitors. Combine volume with topics to see whether presence comes from interest, praise or problems.
Your brand · answers and sources
OverviewAnswersSources
The brand is missing: what should you check?
Example question
Which headphones do you recommend for working in a noisy office?
What you read
Example: a customer asks which headphones to choose for work. Open the answer to see whether your brand appears, which competitors are named and which pages are cited. Use this to identify information to clarify on your website.
The next step
Prepare a proposal to update the product page, then repeat the check using the same questions.
Mentions, recommendations and citations describe distinct signals: they are not added together. The denominator includes only valid answers, with the model and collection method stated.
What you get
The denominator defines the comparison.
Choose competitors and compare mentions over the same period and sources. The chart shows the distribution of collected conversations, helping identify the most prominent brands in the sample.
| Change | Possible effect | Required check |
|---|---|---|
| A new competitor is included | The comparison total grows and your brand’s share may fall. | Compare the same set of brands or make the new basis explicit. |
| A new source is added | Additional conversations may favour some subjects over others. | Distinguish broader coverage from change in channels already observed. |
| Copies are treated differently | Repeated circulation of a story may carry more or less weight. | Apply common deduplication and attribution criteria to every brand. |
What you get
Quality of presence.
Open the topics behind a large share: a crisis can generate many mentions without making a brand more desirable. Use the comparison to choose an investigation; share of voice is not market share.
- Presence volume
- Content sentiment
- Recurring topics
Share in context
The total is part of the result.
Compare how many mentions concern your brand and how many concern selected competitors. Then open the topics: a brand may receive more attention because it launched a product or is facing a problem. The share tells you where to investigate; the mentions explain why.
A story involving several companies may contribute to several counts. Duplicates, ambiguous references and indirect citations require consistent criteria across brands. The report should clarify whether the comparison counts content items, mentions or another unit: using similar names for different measures creates conclusions that look comparable but are not.
The group
Competitors included in the comparison, without implicit additions between periods.
The denominator
Sources, counting unit and conditions that define the total.
AI visibility and conversations
Two shares. Two different questions.
Share of conversation in the media and presence in AI answers describe different phenomena. Placing them side by side can help frame a question; adding them together obscures the meaning of both.
In the media, scope depends on collected content and included brands. In AI, the denominator comprises answers to defined questions, using a particular model and collection method. Strong media exposure may coexist with few recommendations in the AI panel. That difference deserves investigation without automatically inferring that one measure caused the other.
Observed conversation
The space your brand occupies within selected content and sources.
Presence in answers
How often it appears in the AI panel relative to the stated valid denominator.
Combined interpretation
Which topics and sources help explain differences between the two paths.
Comparison over time
Track change on the same basis.
A trend is useful when your team knows which conditions remain comparable. A new source, an added competitor or a different set of questions should be visible in the analysis.
The analytical proposal preserves the scopes of the compared periods and flags discontinuities. With little content, showing counts and context is preferable to implying precision through an unstable percentage. The next step is to identify which topic contributes to the change and which evidence justifies further investigation or action.
- Included brands
- Sources and criteria
- Compared periods
Related paths
Choose your next step.
Check your brand’s presence, compare results or choose content improvements: continue with the feature you need.
Explore every intelligence tool
Choose the tools to see where your brand is found and where it is missing.
ReadFrom question to action
From the question to checking the outcome: context, sources, hypotheses and action plans in the TrustInsider analytical workflow.
ReadA transparent method, not a black box
TrustInsider’s criteria for interpreting reputation and trust: provenance, samples, reviews and the limits of conclusions.
ReadFind the right answer
Find guides, FAQs and methodology to clarify indicators, coverage and access, with dedicated routes for data requests.
Read