Online Emotional Animal Support AI Visibility Ranking Trends - November 2026

Answer capsule

The November 2026 Online Emotional Animal Support benchmark compares 11 companies across 316 AI answers that met its inclusion rules. Pettable leads with 80 recommendations (25.32% of answers). At least one tracked company was recommended in 102 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 Online Emotional Animal Support

Industry leaderboard

Questions This Section Answers

• How do Online Emotional Animal Support 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 named frequently yet recommended rarely, so mention counts and recommendation counts answer different questions. Ties share a rank because equal recommendation counts cannot be separated by this measure alone.

Placement figures sit inside recommendations rather than beside them. A first-place result is a subset of shortlist placements, which are themselves a subset of recommendations. Reading the columns as separate achievements would overstate what the recorded answers show.

Key findings

Tracked-company answer coverage

Questions This Section Answers

• How often did the November 2026 Online Emotional Animal Support answer sample recommend any tracked company?

102 distinct answers recommended at least one tracked company. Counting each company recommendation separately gives 186, because an answer can recommend several companies. Answers with no tracked recommendation may still have recommended companies outside this comparison.

Every qualified answer named at least one tracked company, but only about a third recommended one. That gap is the central distinction: appearing in an answer is not the same as being endorsed by it. The remaining answers may still have named companies outside this comparison.

Because one answer can recommend several companies, company-level recommendation totals exceed the number of answers containing a recommendation. Summing company counts would therefore double-count some answers. Coverage describes the answer set, not market share or relative prominence among untracked providers.

Reach and affirmative recommendation

Pettable ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 250 (79.11%); recommendations: 80 (25.32%). Top 3 placements: 56 (17.72%); first-place placements: 48 (15.19%).

Wording about the company: 107 positive, 142 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 32.0%. The net framing score was 0.42 (defined in Methodology).

170 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 70.00% were Top 3 and 60.00% were first-place.

Pettable illustrates why reach and endorsement must be read apart. It was named in most answers, yet roughly a third of those mentions also carried a recommendation. The large remainder of mentions without endorsement shows that visibility in an answer does not imply affirmative support.

Among its recorded recommendations, most were shortlisted and a majority placed first. Those placement shares describe the wording of endorsements that occurred; they do not describe customers, purchases or conversion.

Recommendation order and placement

Placement describes where a recommended company appeared in an answer's ordering. Shortlist and first-place counts are nested within recommendations, so they cannot be added to recommendation totals or treated as extra wins. A company with few recommendations can still show a high first-place share, but that share rests on a small base.

Recommendation-to-mention ratios vary widely across companies. The ratio describes how often recorded mentions also carried endorsement in these answers; it is not a conversion rate and says nothing about why endorsement was or was not present.

Classified framing in context

Framing classifies the wording surrounding each mention as positive, neutral or negative. Most mentions across companies were neutral, with positive wording less common and negative wording rare. Neutral wording is not a negative signal, and positive wording does not by itself establish why a recommendation appeared.

Net framing summarizes that balance on a bounded scale. It reflects the language of the selected answers, not customer sentiment, reputation or company quality. Framing and recommendation are recorded separately, so a positively framed mention need not include an endorsement.

Company results in detail

Pettable

Questions This Section Answers

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

Pettable ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 250 (79.11%); recommendations: 80 (25.32%). Top 3 placements: 56 (17.72%); first-place placements: 48 (15.19%).

Wording about the company: 107 positive, 142 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 32.0%. The net framing score was 0.42 (defined in Methodology).

170 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 70.00% were Top 3 and 60.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Pettable's mention count fell from 257 to 250, while its recommendation count fell from 142 to 80. The recommendation rate was 41.64% and 25.32% respectively.

Pettable leads on recommendation count and appears in most answers, giving it the broadest reach in this sample. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is moderate: many mentions carried no endorsement. Wording was mostly neutral, with positive framing common and negative framing nearly absent.

Most of its recommendations were shortlisted and a majority placed first. The prior-month comparison shows both mentions and recommendations lower, with a lower recommendation rate; the samples differ, so the change is recorded rather than explained.

CertaPet

Questions This Section Answers

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

CertaPet ranks 2 by recommendation count. Mentions: 104 (32.91%); recommendations: 33 (10.44%). Top 3 placements: 24 (7.59%); first-place placements: 14 (4.43%).

Wording about the company: 39 positive, 65 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 31.7%. The net framing score was 0.38 (defined in Methodology).

71 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 72.73% were Top 3 and 42.42% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, CertaPet's mention count fell from 224 to 104, while its recommendation count fell from 114 to 33. The recommendation rate was 33.43% and 10.44% respectively.

CertaPet holds the second recommendation count with roughly a third of answers mentioning it. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is close to Pettable's, though on a smaller mention base. Framing was predominantly neutral with no negative mentions recorded.

Nearly three-quarters of its recommendations were shortlisted, and a substantial minority placed first. Both mentions and recommendations were lower than in the prior month, and the recommendation rate also fell; because the monthly samples differ, the comparison is descriptive only.

ESA Doctors

Questions This Section Answers

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

ESA Doctors ranks 3 by recommendation count. Mentions: 113 (35.76%); recommendations: 29 (9.18%). Top 3 placements: 14 (4.43%); first-place placements: 6 (1.90%).

Wording about the company: 38 positive, 75 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 25.7%. The net framing score was 0.34 (defined in Methodology).

84 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 48.28% were Top 3 and 20.69% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, ESA Doctors' mention count fell from 187 to 113, while its recommendation count fell from 83 to 29. The recommendation rate was 24.34% and 9.18% respectively.

ESA Doctors ranks third on recommendations while being mentioned more often than CertaPet, so its recommendation-to-mention ratio is lower. Most mentions were neutral, with positive wording present and no negatives recorded.

Under half of its recommendations were shortlisted and about a fifth placed first, a lower placement share than the two companies above it. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were all lower than the prior month, a recorded change the differing samples do not explain.

US Service Animals

Questions This Section Answers

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

US Service Animals ranks 4 by recommendation count. Mentions: 67 (21.20%); recommendations: 19 (6.01%). Top 3 placements: 12 (3.80%); first-place placements: 7 (2.22%).

Wording about the company: 19 positive, 48 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 28.4%. The net framing score was 0.28 (defined in Methodology).

48 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 63.16% were Top 3 and 36.84% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, US Service Animals' mention count rose from 54 to 67, while its recommendation count rose from 14 to 19. The recommendation rate was 4.11% and 6.01% respectively.

US Service Animals ranks fourth on recommendations, with mentions in about a fifth of answers. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio sits near the middle of the field. Framing was largely neutral, with positive wording less frequent and no negatives.

Most of its recommendations were shortlisted and over a third placed first. Unlike most companies here, both mentions and recommendations were higher than in the prior month, as was the recommendation rate. The samples differ, so this is a recorded comparison rather than evidence of a trend.

Support Pets

Questions This Section Answers

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

Support Pets ranks 5 by recommendation count. Mentions: 20 (6.33%); recommendations: 7 (2.22%). Top 3 placements: 4 (1.27%); first-place placements: 3 (0.95%).

Wording about the company: 7 positive, 13 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 35.0%. The net framing score was 0.35 (defined in Methodology).

13 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 57.14% were Top 3 and 42.86% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Support Pets' mention count fell from 47 to 20, while its recommendation count rose from 6 to 7. The recommendation rate was 1.76% and 2.22% respectively.

Support Pets ranks fifth with a small recommendation count and mentions in a modest share of answers. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is among the higher ones in the field, but it rests on a sparse base, so the ratio should be read with caution. Framing was mostly neutral with no negatives.

Over half of its recommendations were shortlisted and several placed first. Mentions were lower than the prior month while recommendations were slightly higher, and the recommendation rate rose; the differing samples limit what that pattern can show.

PetESALetter

Questions This Section Answers

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

PetESALetter ranks 6 by recommendation count. Mentions: 44 (13.92%); recommendations: 6 (1.90%). Top 3 placements: 3 (0.95%); first-place placements: 2 (0.63%).

Wording about the company: 6 positive, 38 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 13.6%. The net framing score was 0.14 (defined in Methodology).

38 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 50.00% were Top 3 and 33.33% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, PetESALetter's mention count fell from 58 to 44, while its recommendation count fell from 30 to 6. The recommendation rate was 8.80% and 1.90% respectively.

PetESALetter ranks sixth on recommendations despite a mention share well above several higher-ranked companies, producing a low recommendation-to-mention ratio. Framing was overwhelmingly neutral, with few positive mentions and no negatives.

Half of its recommendations were shortlisted and a third placed first, on a small base. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were all lower than in the prior month. The samples differ between months, so the decline is recorded without an attributed cause.

RealESALetter

Questions This Section Answers

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

RealESALetter ranks 7 by recommendation count. Mentions: 26 (8.23%); recommendations: 5 (1.58%). Top 3 placements: 3 (0.95%); first-place placements: 3 (0.95%).

Wording about the company: 5 positive, 21 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 19.2%. The net framing score was 0.19 (defined in Methodology).

21 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 60.00% were Top 3 and 60.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, RealESALetter's mention count fell from 182 to 26, while its recommendation count fell from 104 to 5. The recommendation rate was 30.50% and 1.58% respectively.

RealESALetter ranks seventh with a small recommendation count and a modest mention share. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is low relative to the field. Framing was mostly neutral, with a handful of positive mentions and no negatives.

Most of its few recommendations were shortlisted and placed first, a share resting on a very small base. Both mentions and recommendations were far lower than in the prior month, as was the recommendation rate; the differing samples mean the change is reported, not explained.

ESA Pet

Questions This Section Answers

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

ESA Pet ranks 8 by recommendation count. Mentions: 12 (3.80%); recommendations: 3 (0.95%). Top 3 placements: 2 (0.63%); first-place placements: 1 (0.32%).

Wording about the company: 3 positive, 9 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 25.0%. The net framing score was 0.25 (defined in Methodology).

9 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 66.67% were Top 3 and 33.33% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, ESA Pet's mention count fell from 89 to 12, while its recommendation count fell from 42 to 3. The recommendation rate was 12.32% and 0.95% respectively.

ESA Pet ranks eighth with a small recommendation count and mentions in a limited share of answers. Its recommendation-to-mention ratio is moderate but based on few observations. Framing was mostly neutral, with a few positive mentions and no negatives.

Most of its recommendations were shortlisted and a third placed first. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were all lower than in the prior month. Because the monthly samples differ, that comparison describes recorded results rather than a demonstrated shift in standing.

My ESA Therapist

Questions This Section Answers

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

My ESA Therapist ranks 9 by recommendation count. Mentions: 16 (5.06%); recommendations: 2 (0.63%). Top 3 placements: 2 (0.63%); first-place placements: 2 (0.63%).

Wording about the company: 2 positive, 14 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 12.5%. The net framing score was 0.13 (defined in Methodology).

14 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 100.00% were Top 3 and 100.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, My ESA Therapist's mention count fell from 31 to 16, while its recommendation count fell from 11 to 2. The recommendation rate was 3.23% and 0.63% respectively.

My ESA Therapist ranks ninth with a very small recommendation count and a modest mention share, giving it a low recommendation-to-mention ratio. Framing was almost entirely neutral, with few positive mentions and no negatives.

Its few recommendations were all shortlisted and all placed first, a share that rests on a minimal base and should not be read as dominance. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were lower than in the prior month, a recorded comparison the differing samples do not explain.

American Service Pets

Questions This Section Answers

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

American Service Pets ranks 10 by recommendation count. Mentions: 15 (4.75%); recommendations: 1 (0.32%). Top 3 placements: 1 (0.32%); first-place placements: 1 (0.32%).

Wording about the company: 3 positive, 11 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 6.7%. The net framing score was 0.13 (defined in Methodology).

14 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 100.00% were Top 3 and 100.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, American Service Pets' mention count fell from 22 to 15, while its recommendation count fell from 4 to 1. The recommendation rate was 1.17% and 0.32% respectively.

American Service Pets shares the tenth rank on recommendation count, with a modest mention share and a low recommendation-to-mention ratio. Framing was mostly neutral, with a few positive mentions and one negative, one of the few negatives recorded in the field.

Its single recommendation was shortlisted and placed first, so placement shares rest on a minimal base. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were all lower than in the prior month; the samples differ, so no cause is inferred.

Wellness Wag

Questions This Section Answers

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

Wellness Wag ranks 10 by recommendation count. Mentions: 16 (5.06%); recommendations: 1 (0.32%). Top 3 placements: 1 (0.32%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 4 positive, 10 neutral, 2 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 6.3%. The net framing score was 0.13 (defined in Methodology).

15 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 100.00% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Wellness Wag's mention count fell from 32 to 16, while its recommendation count fell from 10 to 1. The recommendation rate was 2.93% and 0.32% respectively.

Wellness Wag shares the tenth rank on recommendation count, with a modest mention share and a low recommendation-to-mention ratio. Its framing included the most negative mentions recorded in the field alongside a few positives, though neutral wording still dominated.

Its single recommendation was shortlisted but not placed first, so its first-place count is a measured zero rather than a missing value. Mentions, recommendations and the recommendation rate were lower than in the prior month, a comparison limited by differing samples.

Earlier ranking snapshot context

Questions This Section Answers

• How do the available Online Emotional Animal Support snapshots from October 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 earlier snapshot comes from a separate set of AI answers, not the same people answering again. Counts, rates and ranks can therefore move between months without implying a change in the underlying companies. A lower answer total does not by itself account for any company's movement.

Reading counts alongside rates shows that a company can lose recommendations while its rate holds, or gain mentions while its rate falls. Rank changes should be read as recorded positions in each month's sample, not as evidence of stability or decline.

What the November Rankings Show

These results answer different questions. Reach asks how often a company appeared; recommendation asks whether an answer affirmatively endorsed it; placement asks where an endorsement sat within an answer; framing asks how the wording was classified. A company can be visible without being endorsed, or endorsed without being placed first.

The leaderboard orders companies by recommendation count, but the surrounding measures show that this single ordering hides variation in reach, ratio and placement. Ties reflect equal recommendation counts and nothing more. Framing is not sentiment, and ratios are not conversion.

Monthly comparisons are separate samples, so changes in counts and rates are recorded rather than explained. The findings describe the reviewed AI answers, not verified facts about the companies or their products.

Methodology

Questions This Section Answers

• How were the November 2026 Online Emotional Animal Support AI visibility measures counted, and what do they not establish?

This benchmark has partial coverage: 2 of 3 planned question categories contributed usable observations; 1 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; 11 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: only some planned question categories contributed usable answers, and findings apply to that available set. The reporting month labels the period, though exact collection dates were not verified. Each company is counted at most once per qualifying answer, and placement results are nested within recommendations.

The recommendation-to-mention ratio and net framing describe answer wording, not customers, sales or company quality. One answer can name several companies, so company totals overlap. Monthly samples differ in size and services covered, so comparisons show recorded change without establishing its cause.