Greens and Superfood Supplements AI Visibility Ranking Trends - November 2026

Answer capsule

The November 2026 Greens and Superfood Supplements benchmark compares 9 companies across 291 AI answers that met its inclusion rules. AG1 leads with 253 recommendations (86.94% of answers). At least one tracked company was recommended in 279 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 Greens and Superfood Supplements

Industry leaderboard

Questions This Section Answers

• How do Greens and Superfood Supplements rank by recorded AI recommendations in November 2026?

The leaderboard orders companies by how many answers contained an affirmative recommendation, so it measures recorded endorsement rather than mere appearance. A company can be mentioned often yet recommended less often, and those two counts answer different questions.

Ties matter because equal recommendation counts share a rank position; the printed table shows the ordering as recorded. Placement figures are nested inside recommendations, so first-place and shortlist counts are subsets, not separate wins to add up.

Key findings

Tracked-company answer coverage

Questions This Section Answers

• How often did the November 2026 Greens and Superfood Supplements answer sample recommend any tracked company?

279 distinct answers recommended at least one tracked company. Counting each company recommendation separately gives 1000, because an answer can recommend several companies. Answers with no tracked recommendation may still have recommended companies outside this comparison.

Nearly every included answer named at least one tracked company, and most recommended one. Because a single answer can endorse several companies, company-level recommendation totals exceed the number of answers, so those totals should not be read as distinct answer counts.

The small remainder of answers without a tracked recommendation may still have named companies outside this comparison. Coverage describes what these answers contained, not the size or share of the wider market.

Reach and affirmative recommendation

AG1 ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 269 (92.44%); recommendations: 253 (86.94%). Top 3 placements: 248 (85.22%); first-place placements: 219 (75.26%).

Wording about the company: 255 positive, 12 neutral, 2 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.1%. The net framing score was 0.94 (defined in Methodology).

16 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 98.02% were Top 3 and 86.56% were first-place.

AG1's profile shows why mention and recommendation are separate measures: most mentions carried an endorsement, but a minority did not. Reach describes appearance in an answer; recommendation describes affirmative endorsement within that appearance.

The recommendation-to-mention ratio summarizes the recorded answers only. It is not a conversion rate, a customer measure or evidence about why an endorsement was or was not given.

Recommendation order and placement

Placement records where a recommended company appeared in an answer's ordering. Shortlist placements sit inside recommendations, and first-place placements sit inside shortlist placements, so the counts are nested rather than cumulative.

A high first-place share means the company often led the recorded ordering when recommended; it does not establish preference among customers or any effect on purchasing.

Classified framing in context

Framing classifies the wording used about a company in the selected answers. Positive, neutral and negative labels describe how the company was discussed, not how customers feel or how good the company is.

Most mentions here were classified positive, with neutral and negative wording far less common. That pattern does not explain why recommendations occurred or did not occur, and it should not be read as reputation evidence.

Company results in detail

AG1

Questions This Section Answers

• What do the November 2026 AI answer results show about AG1 mentions, recommendations and placement?

AG1 ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 269 (92.44%); recommendations: 253 (86.94%). Top 3 placements: 248 (85.22%); first-place placements: 219 (75.26%).

Wording about the company: 255 positive, 12 neutral, 2 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.1%. The net framing score was 0.94 (defined in Methodology).

16 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 98.02% were Top 3 and 86.56% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, AG1's mention count rose from 230 to 269, while its recommendation count rose from 199 to 253. The recommendation rate was 78.97% and 86.94% respectively.

AG1 leads the recorded recommendation count and appears in most included answers, with the large majority of its mentions also carrying an endorsement. Its placements skew heavily toward the top of answer orderings, and first-place appearances form a substantial part of its recommendations.

Wording about AG1 was overwhelmingly positive, with a few neutral and negative mentions. The month-over-month comparison shows both counts higher than the prior sample, though separate monthly samples cannot establish why.

Transparent Labs

Questions This Section Answers

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

Transparent Labs ranks 2 by recommendation count. Mentions: 176 (60.48%); recommendations: 174 (59.79%). Top 3 placements: 102 (35.05%); first-place placements: 9 (3.09%).

Wording about the company: 176 positive, 0 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 98.9%. The net framing score was 1.00 (defined in Methodology).

2 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 58.62% were Top 3 and 5.17% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Transparent Labs' mention count rose from 87 to 176, while its recommendation count rose from 85 to 174. The recommendation rate was 33.73% and 59.79% respectively.

Transparent Labs holds the second recommendation count, and almost every mention of it also carried an endorsement, giving it one of the tighter mention-to-recommendation relationships in the set. Its shortlist placements are common, while first-place appearances are comparatively rare.

All recorded mentions were classified positive. The prior-month comparison shows both mentions and recommendations higher, but the samples differ and the change should not be attributed to any cause.

Amazing Grass

Questions This Section Answers

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

Amazing Grass ranks 3 by recommendation count. Mentions: 156 (53.61%); recommendations: 145 (49.83%). Top 3 placements: 81 (27.84%); first-place placements: 6 (2.06%).

Wording about the company: 147 positive, 9 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 92.9%. The net framing score was 0.94 (defined in Methodology).

11 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 55.86% were Top 3 and 4.14% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Amazing Grass' mention count rose from 151 to 156, while its recommendation count rose from 123 to 145. The recommendation rate was 48.81% and 49.83% respectively.

Amazing Grass ranks third by recommendation count, with most of its mentions endorsed and a modest number left without a recommendation. Shortlist placements account for roughly half of its recommendations, and first-place appearances are uncommon.

Wording was mostly positive with some neutral mentions and no negative ones. Both counts were higher than in the prior sample, a recorded comparison whose cause the data do not identify.

Bloom Nutrition

Questions This Section Answers

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

Bloom Nutrition ranks 4 by recommendation count. Mentions: 125 (42.96%); recommendations: 120 (41.24%). Top 3 placements: 63 (21.65%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 121 positive, 4 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 96.0%. The net framing score was 0.97 (defined in Methodology).

5 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 52.50% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Bloom Nutrition's mention count rose from 124 to 125, while its recommendation count rose from 104 to 120. The recommendation rate was 41.27% and 41.24% respectively.

Bloom Nutrition sits fourth by recommendation count, and nearly all of its mentions carried an endorsement. Its recommendations frequently reach the shortlist, but it recorded no first-place placements at all, a measured zero rather than a missing value.

Wording was almost entirely positive with a few neutral mentions. Mentions were essentially flat against the prior sample while recommendations rose, and the differing samples do not explain that pattern.

Garden of Life

Questions This Section Answers

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

Garden of Life ranks 5 by recommendation count. Mentions: 124 (42.61%); recommendations: 119 (40.89%). Top 3 placements: 58 (19.93%); first-place placements: 10 (3.44%).

Wording about the company: 120 positive, 3 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 96.0%. The net framing score was 0.96 (defined in Methodology).

5 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 48.74% were Top 3 and 8.40% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Garden of Life's mention count rose from 105 to 124, while its recommendation count rose from 97 to 119. The recommendation rate was 38.49% and 40.89% respectively.

Garden of Life ranks fifth, with almost every mention endorsed and only a handful without a recommendation. Its shortlist placements are moderate, and first-place appearances, while limited, form a larger share of its recommendations than several higher-ranked peers.

Wording was largely positive, with a few neutral and one negative mention. Both counts were higher than in the prior sample, a comparison across separate monthly answer sets.

Live it Up

Questions This Section Answers

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

Live it Up ranks 6 by recommendation count. Mentions: 111 (38.14%); recommendations: 100 (34.36%). Top 3 placements: 78 (26.80%); first-place placements: 13 (4.47%).

Wording about the company: 102 positive, 9 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 90.1%. The net framing score was 0.92 (defined in Methodology).

11 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 78.00% were Top 3 and 13.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Live it Up's mention count fell from 114 to 111, while its recommendation count stayed at 100. The recommendation rate was 39.68% and 34.36% respectively. The count was unchanged: the rate difference comes from dividing it by 252 answers in October 2026 and 291 in November.

Live it Up ranks sixth by recommendation count, and its mentions were endorsed at a slightly lower proportion than most peers. A relatively large share of its recommendations reached the shortlist, and first-place appearances were comparatively frequent.

Wording was mostly positive with some neutral mentions. Its recommendation count was unchanged from the prior month while mentions fell, and the recorded rate was lower; these are separate observations from distinct monthly answer samples, and the comparison does not establish why either figure moved.

Organifi

Questions This Section Answers

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

Organifi ranks 7 by recommendation count. Mentions: 76 (26.12%); recommendations: 72 (24.74%). Top 3 placements: 44 (15.12%); first-place placements: 10 (3.44%).

Wording about the company: 74 positive, 2 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.7%. The net framing score was 0.97 (defined in Methodology).

4 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 61.11% were Top 3 and 13.89% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Organifi's mention count rose from 55 to 76, while its recommendation count rose from 47 to 72. The recommendation rate was 18.65% and 24.74% respectively.

Organifi ranks seventh, with most of its mentions endorsed and a small number without a recommendation. A majority of its recommendations reached the shortlist, and first-place appearances were a meaningful minority of them.

Wording was almost entirely positive with a couple of neutral mentions. Both counts were higher than in the prior sample, a recorded change across separate monthly answer sets that the data do not explain.

Nested Naturals

Questions This Section Answers

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

Nested Naturals ranks 8 by recommendation count. Mentions: 13 (4.47%); recommendations: 13 (4.47%). Top 3 placements: 7 (2.41%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 13 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, 53.85% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Nested Naturals' mention count fell from 14 to 13, while its recommendation count stayed at 13. The recommendation rate was 5.16% and 4.47% respectively. The count was unchanged: the rate difference comes from dividing it by 252 answers in October 2026 and 291 in November.

Nested Naturals ranks eighth on a small base: every recorded mention carried an endorsement, so its mention-to-recommendation ratio is at the ceiling. That strong ratio rests on few observations and should be read with that sparsity in mind.

About half of its recommendations reached the shortlist, and it recorded no first-place placements. All mentions were classified positive. Its recommendation count was unchanged from the prior sample while mentions edged down.

KOS

Questions This Section Answers

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

KOS ranks 9 by recommendation count. Mentions: 8 (2.75%); recommendations: 4 (1.37%). Top 3 placements: 0 (0.00%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 4 positive, 3 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 50.0%. The net framing score was 0.38 (defined in Methodology).

4 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, KOS's mention count fell from 11 to 8, while its recommendation count fell from 10 to 4. The recommendation rate was 3.97% and 1.37% respectively.

KOS ranks ninth on a sparse base, and only half of its mentions carried an endorsement, the lowest such proportion in the set. It recorded no shortlist or first-place placements, so those counts are measured zeros rather than absent observations.

Wording was mixed, with positive, neutral and negative mentions all present. Both mentions and recommendations were lower than in the prior sample, a comparison across differing answer sets.

Earlier ranking snapshot context

Questions This Section Answers

• How do the available Greens and Superfood Supplements snapshots from July 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.

Each month is a separate sample of AI answers, and the number of included answers differs across months, so counts and rates are not directly interchangeable between periods. A rate and a count are distinct measures, and a change in either does not by itself explain the other.

The rank columns show ordering within each month's recorded results. They do not establish rank stability, equivalent sampling or the reasons behind any shift.

What the November Rankings Show

These measures 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 it was worded. Reading them together gives a fuller picture than any single count.

Because placements nest inside recommendations and answers can name several companies, totals overlap and should not be summed. The results describe the reviewed AI answers, not verified product facts, customer sentiment or commercial outcomes.

Methodology

Questions This Section Answers

• How were the November 2026 Greens and Superfood Supplements 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; 9 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:

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

Coverage is partial: usable observations came from all planned question categories, but the findings apply only to the available answer set, and the exact collection dates were not verified. Each company is counted at most once per answer, and a recommendation requires both affirmative endorsement and positive wording.

Rates use the full benchmark answer total, and placement results are included within recommendations rather than added to them. Net framing describes answer wording, not customer satisfaction or company quality. Monthly samples differ, so comparisons show recorded change without establishing its cause.