Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers AI Visibility Ranking Trends - November 2026

Answer capsule

The November 2026 Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers benchmark compares 10 companies across 592 AI answers that met its inclusion rules. JM Bullion leads with 344 recommendations (58.11% of answers). At least one tracked company was recommended in 474 answers; some answers recommended several companies.

The rankings distinguish being mentioned from receiving an affirmative recommendation, then examine placement and the wording used about each company. Earlier monthly results show how counts and rates changed, with each month using its own answer total. These results describe the answers reviewed, not product quality or customer satisfaction. Differences between monthly samples limit comparisons and do not establish why a result changed.

For the strategic interpretation of this benchmark, read CiteWorks Studio's analysis of How AI Search Is Recommending Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers

Industry leaderboard

Questions This Section Answers

• How do Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers rank by recorded AI recommendations in November 2026?

The leaderboard orders companies by how many answers affirmatively recommended them, not by how often they appeared. A company can be mentioned frequently yet recommended less often, so mention counts and recommendation counts answer different questions. Ties in recommendation counts would share a rank; the printed table shows no such tie here.

Placement figures are nested inside recommendations rather than separate wins. Top-three and first-place counts describe where a recommended company sat in an answer's ordering. Reading rank, mention rate and placement together gives a fuller picture than any single column, and none of these columns measures sales or customer behavior.

Key findings

Tracked-company answer coverage

Questions This Section Answers

• How often did the November 2026 Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers answer sample recommend any tracked company?

474 distinct answers recommended at least one tracked company. Counting each company recommendation separately gives 1793, because an answer can recommend several companies. Answers with no tracked recommendation may still have recommended companies outside this comparison.

Coverage describes how many reviewed answers touched any tracked company. Nearly every answer mentioned at least one, while a smaller group recommended at least one. Because a single answer can recommend several companies, company-level recommendation totals exceed the number of answers that recommended anyone.

The answers with no tracked recommendation are not empty of content; they may have named companies outside this comparison. Coverage therefore describes the reach of the tracked set within these answers, not overall market presence or dominance.

Reach and affirmative recommendation

JM Bullion ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 458 (77.36%); recommendations: 344 (58.11%). Top 3 placements: 316 (53.38%); first-place placements: 115 (19.43%).

Wording about the company: 344 positive, 114 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 75.1%. The net framing score was 0.75 (defined in Methodology).

114 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 91.86% were Top 3 and 33.43% were first-place.

Mention means a company appeared in an answer; recommendation means the answer affirmatively endorsed it. JM Bullion leads on recommendation count, but its mentions outnumber its recommendations, so a substantial share of appearances carried no endorsement. That gap is a recorded feature of the answers, not evidence about why endorsement was withheld.

Ranking by recommendation count rewards affirmative endorsement rather than mere visibility. A company with fewer mentions can still rank near the top if its appearances more often include a recommendation.

Recommendation order and placement

Placement describes where a recommended company appeared in an answer's ordering. Top-three placements are a subset of recommendations, and first-place placements are a subset of top-three placements, so these counts should not be added together or read as extra wins.

Recommendation-to-mention ratios vary widely across the table. High ratios on small mention bases are less stable than similar ratios built on larger bases, so a strong ratio for a lightly mentioned company warrants caution. These ratios describe answer wording, not customer conversion.

Classified framing in context

Framing classifies the wording used about a company in the reviewed answers. Positive wording dominates the table, with neutral wording forming a smaller share and negative wording appearing rarely. A neutral mention is neither an endorsement nor a criticism; it simply records how the company was described.

Framing is not customer sentiment, reputation or company quality. Positive wording does not establish why a recommendation occurred, and the near-absence of negative wording does not prove that no concerns exist outside these answers.

Company results in detail

JM Bullion

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about JM Bullion mentions, recommendations and placement?

JM Bullion ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 458 (77.36%); recommendations: 344 (58.11%). Top 3 placements: 316 (53.38%); first-place placements: 115 (19.43%).

Wording about the company: 344 positive, 114 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 75.1%. The net framing score was 0.75 (defined in Methodology).

114 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 91.86% were Top 3 and 33.43% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, JM Bullion's mention count fell from 516 to 458, while its recommendation count rose from 324 to 344. The recommendation rate was 50.00% and 58.11% respectively.

JM Bullion leads on recommendation count while appearing in most reviewed answers. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio sits well below the ratios of several smaller peers, meaning a notable share of its appearances carried no endorsement. Its first-place share is modest relative to its overall recommendation volume.

Between the two most recent months, its mention count declined while its recommendation count rose, and its recommendation rate increased. These are recorded comparisons from separate monthly samples; they do not establish why the counts moved or that any change reflects an intervention.

APMEX

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about APMEX mentions, recommendations and placement?

APMEX ranks 2 by recommendation count. Mentions: 442 (74.66%); recommendations: 334 (56.42%). Top 3 placements: 310 (52.36%); first-place placements: 188 (31.76%).

Wording about the company: 334 positive, 108 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 75.6%. The net framing score was 0.76 (defined in Methodology).

108 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 92.81% were Top 3 and 56.29% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, APMEX's mention count fell from 509 to 442, while its recommendation count rose from 317 to 334. The recommendation rate was 48.92% and 56.42% respectively.

APMEX ranks second on recommendation count with a mention base close to the leader's. Its distinctive feature is first-place placement: a large share of its recommendations sat at the top of an answer's ordering, giving it the strongest first-place presence in the table. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is similar to the leader's.

Its mention count declined across the two most recent months while its recommendation count and recommendation rate rose. The comparison is between separate monthly samples and does not explain the movement.

American Hartford Gold

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about American Hartford Gold mentions, recommendations and placement?

American Hartford Gold ranks 3 by recommendation count. Mentions: 304 (51.35%); recommendations: 286 (48.31%). Top 3 placements: 167 (28.21%); first-place placements: 44 (7.43%).

Wording about the company: 287 positive, 16 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.1%. The net framing score was 0.94 (defined in Methodology).

18 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 58.39% were Top 3 and 15.38% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, American Hartford Gold's mention count rose from 271 to 304, while its recommendation count rose from 252 to 286. The recommendation rate was 38.89% and 48.31% respectively.

American Hartford Gold ranks third on recommendation count, but its recommendation-to-mention ratio is among the highest in the table: most appearances included an endorsement. Its top-three and first-place shares are comparatively modest, so recommendations were frequent but often not placed near the top of an answer.

Its mention count, recommendation count and recommendation rate all rose across the two most recent months. That is a recorded comparison between separate samples, not evidence of a cause or of durable standing.

Augusta Precious Metals

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Augusta Precious Metals mentions, recommendations and placement?

Augusta Precious Metals ranks 4 by recommendation count. Mentions: 289 (48.82%); recommendations: 281 (47.47%). Top 3 placements: 195 (32.94%); first-place placements: 82 (13.85%).

Wording about the company: 282 positive, 7 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 97.2%. The net framing score was 0.98 (defined in Methodology).

8 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 69.40% were Top 3 and 29.18% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Augusta Precious Metals' mention count rose from 260 to 289, while its recommendation count rose from 249 to 281. The recommendation rate was 38.43% and 47.47% respectively.

Augusta Precious Metals holds fourth place with a recommendation-to-mention ratio near the top of the table, indicating that nearly every appearance carried an endorsement. Its top-three share is solid, and its first-place share is moderate, placing it between the high-placement leaders and the mid-table companies.

Its mention count, recommendation count and recommendation rate rose across the two most recent months. The comparison covers separate monthly samples and does not establish why the figures changed.

Goldco

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Goldco mentions, recommendations and placement?

Goldco ranks 5 by recommendation count. Mentions: 261 (44.09%); recommendations: 249 (42.06%). Top 3 placements: 128 (21.62%); first-place placements: 19 (3.21%).

Wording about the company: 249 positive, 12 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 95.4%. The net framing score was 0.95 (defined in Methodology).

12 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 51.41% were Top 3 and 7.63% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Goldco's mention count rose from 217 to 261, while its recommendation count rose from 203 to 249. The recommendation rate was 31.33% and 42.06% respectively.

Goldco ranks fifth on recommendation count with a high recommendation-to-mention ratio, so most of its appearances included an endorsement. Its placement profile is more modest: a smaller share of its recommendations reached the top three, and first-place placements were uncommon.

Its mention count, recommendation count and recommendation rate rose across the two most recent months. These are recorded comparisons between separate samples, not evidence of improvement or of any underlying cause.

Birch Gold Group

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Birch Gold Group mentions, recommendations and placement?

Birch Gold Group ranks 6 by recommendation count. Mentions: 176 (29.73%); recommendations: 169 (28.55%). Top 3 placements: 65 (10.98%); first-place placements: 2 (0.34%).

Wording about the company: 169 positive, 7 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 96.0%. The net framing score was 0.96 (defined in Methodology).

7 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 38.46% were Top 3 and 1.18% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Birch Gold Group's mention count rose from 148 to 176, while its recommendation count rose from 116 to 169. The recommendation rate was 17.90% and 28.55% respectively.

Birch Gold Group ranks sixth with a high recommendation-to-mention ratio, meaning appearances usually carried an endorsement. Its placement profile is thin, however: relatively few recommendations reached the top three, and first-place placements were rare. Its reach is well below the leading group.

Its mention count, recommendation count and recommendation rate rose across the two most recent months. The comparison is between separate monthly samples and does not explain the movement.

Noble Gold Investments

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Noble Gold Investments mentions, recommendations and placement?

Noble Gold Investments ranks 7 by recommendation count. Mentions: 95 (16.05%); recommendations: 90 (15.20%). Top 3 placements: 14 (2.36%); first-place placements: 3 (0.51%).

Wording about the company: 90 positive, 5 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.7%. The net framing score was 0.95 (defined in Methodology).

5 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 15.56% were Top 3 and 3.33% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Noble Gold Investments' mention count fell from 99 to 95, while its recommendation count fell from 92 to 90. The recommendation rate was 14.20% and 15.20% respectively.

Noble Gold Investments ranks seventh with a high recommendation-to-mention ratio, so most appearances included an endorsement. Its placement profile is limited: few recommendations reached the top three and first-place placements were rare. Its overall reach is modest relative to the leading companies.

Its mention count and recommendation count both declined slightly across the two most recent months while its recommendation rate edged up. These are recorded comparisons between separate samples, not evidence of lost standing or of a cause.

Orion Metal Exchange

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Orion Metal Exchange mentions, recommendations and placement?

Orion Metal Exchange ranks 8 by recommendation count. Mentions: 30 (5.07%); recommendations: 27 (4.56%). Top 3 placements: 4 (0.68%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 27 positive, 3 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 90.0%. The net framing score was 0.90 (defined in Methodology).

3 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 14.81% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Orion Metal Exchange's mention count rose from 23 to 30, while its recommendation count rose from 22 to 27. The recommendation rate was 3.40% and 4.56% respectively.

Orion Metal Exchange ranks eighth with a high recommendation-to-mention ratio on a small mention base, so the ratio should be read with caution. Its placement profile is very limited: a small number of recommendations reached the top three and none reached first place.

Its mention count and recommendation count rose across the two most recent months, and its recommendation rate increased slightly. The comparison covers separate monthly samples and does not establish why the figures changed.

Advantage Gold

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Advantage Gold mentions, recommendations and placement?

Advantage Gold ranks 9 by recommendation count. Mentions: 16 (2.70%); recommendations: 11 (1.86%). Top 3 placements: 2 (0.34%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 11 positive, 5 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 68.8%. The net framing score was 0.69 (defined in Methodology).

5 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 18.18% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Advantage Gold's mention count fell from 18 to 16, while its recommendation count fell from 12 to 11. The recommendation rate was 1.85% and 1.86% respectively.

Advantage Gold ranks ninth with the lowest recommendation-to-mention ratio among companies that were recommended at all, meaning a notable share of its appearances carried no endorsement. Its placement profile is minimal: few recommendations reached the top three and none reached first place. Its mention base is small, so ratios are sensitive to single answers.

Its mention count and recommendation count declined slightly across the two most recent months while its recommendation rate was essentially flat. These are recorded comparisons between separate samples.

Thor Metals Group

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about Thor Metals Group mentions, recommendations and placement?

Thor Metals Group ranks 10 by recommendation count. Mentions: 2 (0.34%); recommendations: 2 (0.34%). Top 3 placements: 0 (0.00%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 2 positive, 0 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 100.0%. The net framing score was 1.00 (defined in Methodology).

0 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 0.00% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Thor Metals Group's mention count rose from 0 to 2, while its recommendation count rose from 0 to 2. The recommendation rate was 0.00% and 0.34% respectively.

Thor Metals Group ranks tenth with a very small mention base: every recorded appearance carried an endorsement, but no recommendation reached the top three or first place. With so few observations, the perfect recommendation-to-mention ratio is fragile and should not be read as a stable pattern.

Its mention and recommendation counts rose from zero across the two most recent months. A zero in the earlier month is a measured result, not a missing observation, and the change does not establish a trend.

Earlier ranking snapshot context

Questions This Section Answers

• How do the available Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers snapshots from May 2026 to November 2026 differ in recommendation coverage and measurement scope?

Only months with verified results are shown. Monthly sample coverage is listed in Methodology.

The monthly history shows separate samples of AI answers, each with its own answer total and coverage. Counts, rates and ranks should be read together, but a rank can shift for reasons the printed evidence does not identify, and the separate snapshots do not establish rank stability or equivalent sampling.

Smaller answer totals in a given month do not establish why any company's counts or rates moved. The comparisons show recorded change across separate samples; they do not demonstrate causation.

What the November Rankings Show

The November results show that reach, recommendation, placement and framing answer different questions. Reach asks whether a company appeared; recommendation asks whether the answer affirmatively endorsed it; placement asks where an endorsed company sat in the ordering; framing asks how the wording was classified. A company can be strong on one and modest on another.

The leading pair combine broad reach with high recommendation counts, while several mid-table companies show a larger share of their appearances as endorsements but appear less often. Placement separates companies further: some recommendations cluster near the top, others rarely do. Framing is overwhelmingly positive or neutral across the table, which describes the wording of these answers rather than customer sentiment or company quality. None of these measures establishes why an answer recommended a company or how any customer behaved.

Methodology

Questions This Section Answers

• How were the November 2026 Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers AI visibility measures counted, and what do they not establish?

This benchmark has partial coverage: 3 of 3 planned question categories contributed usable observations; 0 contributed none. This describes question-category coverage, not demonstrated platform outages. Findings apply to the available answer set.

The month in the title is the reporting period. The exact dates when the original AI answers were collected have not been verified.

Each company is counted at most once in each answer that meets the benchmark rules. A recommendation requires both an affirmative endorsement and positive wording. Mention, recommendation, Top 3 and first-place rates use the full benchmark answer total. Top 3 and first-place results are included within recommendations, not added to them.

The recommendation-to-mention ratio divides recommendations by mentions. It describes AI answer wording, not customer conversion. Net framing is positive minus negative mentions, divided by all mentions, on a scale from -1 to +1. It does not measure customer satisfaction or company quality.

Market: US; 10 tracked companies. AI services represented: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, Perplexity.

Research screening totals (answer observations can include repeated questions):

The source does not provide a reader-facing definition of “reserved”; that screening label is reported without inferring a reason for exclusion. Only the included benchmark answers form the rate denominator.

One answer can mention or recommend several companies. Adding company totals would therefore count some answers more than once. The results describe the AI answers reviewed, not independently verified facts about the companies or their products.

Monthly sample coverage:

Reliable results for May 2026 are unavailable. This is a gap in the history, not a result of zero. Reliable results for June 2026 are unavailable. This is a gap in the history, not a result of zero.

The answer samples differ between months. These comparisons show how the recorded results changed; they do not establish why they changed.

These findings cover the reviewed AI answers only, drawn from several AI services and a partial set of question categories. The reporting month labels the period; exact collection dates were not verified. Each company is counted at most once per answer, and placement results are included within recommendations rather than added to them.

Recommendation-to-mention ratios and net framing describe answer wording, not customer conversion, satisfaction or company quality. Monthly samples differ, so comparisons show recorded change without establishing cause. Unavailable months are gaps in the history, not zero results, and the source does not define the screening label “reserved.”