Online Stock Brokers AI Visibility Ranking Trends - November 2026

Answer capsule

The November 2026 Online Stock Brokers benchmark compares 10 companies across 591 AI answers that met its inclusion rules. Fidelity leads with 534 recommendations (90.36% of answers). At least one tracked company was recommended in 548 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 Stock Brokers

Industry leaderboard

Questions This Section Answers

• How do Online Stock Brokers rank by recorded AI recommendations in November 2026?

The leaderboard orders companies by how many answers affirmatively recommended them. That count answers a narrower question than reach: a company can appear often without being endorsed often, and the gap between mention and recommendation is where much of the interpretation sits.

Ties matter because equal recommendation counts share a rank; the printed table shows where that occurs. Placement is a further subset, since shortlist and first-place results sit inside recommendations rather than beside them. Reading all three layers separately avoids treating a frequent appearance as an endorsement or a high placement as extra support.

Key findings

Tracked-company answer coverage

Questions This Section Answers

• How often did the November 2026 Online Stock Brokers answer sample recommend any tracked company?

548 distinct answers recommended at least one tracked company. Counting each company recommendation separately gives 3056, because an answer can recommend several companies. Answers with no tracked recommendation may still have recommended companies outside this comparison.

Almost every qualified answer mentioned at least one tracked company, and nearly all recommended one. Because a single answer can name several brokers, the sum of company recommendations exceeds the number of answers; that arithmetic reflects overlapping coverage, not market share.

The small group of answers with no tracked recommendation is a measured result, not a gap in collection. Those answers may still have named brokers outside this comparison, so coverage here describes the tracked set only and should not be read as the whole brokerage market.

Reach and affirmative recommendation

Fidelity ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 587 (99.32%); recommendations: 534 (90.36%). Top 3 placements: 473 (80.03%); first-place placements: 339 (57.36%).

Wording about the company: 542 positive, 36 neutral, 9 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 91.0%. The net framing score was 0.91 (defined in Methodology).

53 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 88.58% were Top 3 and 63.48% were first-place.

Mention and recommendation answer different questions. A mention records that a company appeared in an answer; a recommendation requires an affirmative endorsement, so the two counts diverge even for the most frequently named brokers.

Fidelity illustrates the distinction: it appears in nearly every answer and is recommended in most of them, leaving a minority of mentions without endorsement. The recommendation-to-mention ratio summarizes that overlap for the recorded answers. It is not a conversion rate, and it says nothing about why an answer endorsed one broker over another.

Recommendation order and placement

Shortlist and first-place placements are nested inside recommendations, not additional to them. A company recommended in many answers may still rarely occupy the opening position, and the table shows that spread clearly across the field.

Charles Schwab and Fidelity both receive many shortlist placements, yet their first-place counts differ sharply, so order within an answer carries information that raw recommendation counts do not. Placement describes position in the recorded answer text, not customer preference or eventual account choice.

Classified framing in context

Framing records how the selected answers worded their references: positive, neutral or negative. Most mentions across the field are positive, with neutral wording a smaller share and negative wording rarer still. The net framing score condenses that balance onto a fixed scale.

Favorable wording is not the same as customer sentiment or company quality, and it does not explain why a recommendation appeared. A company can be described positively without being endorsed, and the framing counts should be read alongside, not instead of, the recommendation figures.

Company results in detail

Fidelity

Questions This Section Answers

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

Fidelity ranks 1 by recommendation count. Mentions: 587 (99.32%); recommendations: 534 (90.36%). Top 3 placements: 473 (80.03%); first-place placements: 339 (57.36%).

Wording about the company: 542 positive, 36 neutral, 9 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 91.0%. The net framing score was 0.91 (defined in Methodology).

53 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 88.58% were Top 3 and 63.48% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Fidelity's mention count fell from 666 to 587, while its recommendation count fell from 568 to 534. The recommendation rate was 84.52% and 90.36% respectively.

Fidelity leads the recommendation count and appears in nearly every answer, with a high share of those mentions carrying an endorsement. Its shortlist placements are numerous, and first-place placements form a large subset of them, giving it an unusually strong position profile among the tracked brokers.

Wording is overwhelmingly positive with few negative mentions. The month-over-month comparison shows lower mention and recommendation counts than the prior sample, while the recommendation rate rose; the samples differ, so the change in counts and the change in rate are reported separately without a cause.

Charles Schwab

Questions This Section Answers

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

Charles Schwab ranks 2 by recommendation count. Mentions: 588 (99.49%); recommendations: 530 (89.68%). Top 3 placements: 481 (81.39%); first-place placements: 97 (16.41%).

Wording about the company: 539 positive, 40 neutral, 9 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 90.1%. The net framing score was 0.90 (defined in Methodology).

58 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 90.75% were Top 3 and 18.30% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Charles Schwab's mention count fell from 662 to 588, while its recommendation count fell from 560 to 530. The recommendation rate was 83.33% and 89.68% respectively.

Charles Schwab sits just behind Fidelity on recommendation count and appears in slightly more answers, so its reach is comparable even though its endorsement total is marginally lower. Its shortlist placements are the highest in the field.

What distinguishes its profile is first-place placement: only a modest share of its recommendations open the answer, far below Fidelity's. Positive wording dominates its mentions. Counts fell relative to the prior sample while the recommendation rate rose; the differing samples mean the two movements are recorded, not explained.

Interactive Brokers

Questions This Section Answers

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

Interactive Brokers ranks 3 by recommendation count. Mentions: 544 (92.05%); recommendations: 505 (85.45%). Top 3 placements: 370 (62.61%); first-place placements: 43 (7.28%).

Wording about the company: 513 positive, 31 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 92.8%. The net framing score was 0.94 (defined in Methodology).

39 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 73.27% were Top 3 and 8.51% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Interactive Brokers' mention count fell from 583 to 544, while its recommendation count fell from 520 to 505. The recommendation rate was 77.38% and 85.45% respectively.

Interactive Brokers holds third place on recommendations with strong reach and a recommendation-to-mention ratio near the top of the field. Its shortlist placements are substantial, though first-place placements are comparatively few, so it is endorsed often but rarely placed first.

Its mentions include no negative wording in this sample, and positive framing is dominant. Both mention and recommendation counts were lower than the prior month while the recommendation rate was higher; because the answer samples differ, that pattern is a recorded comparison rather than evidence of a trend.

Robinhood

Questions This Section Answers

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

Robinhood ranks 4 by recommendation count. Mentions: 554 (93.74%); recommendations: 481 (81.39%). Top 3 placements: 90 (15.23%); first-place placements: 19 (3.21%).

Wording about the company: 490 positive, 52 neutral, 12 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 86.8%. The net framing score was 0.86 (defined in Methodology).

73 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 18.71% were Top 3 and 3.95% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Robinhood's mention count fell from 630 to 554, while its recommendation count fell from 526 to 481. The recommendation rate was 78.27% and 81.39% respectively.

Robinhood ranks fourth on recommendations and appears in a large majority of answers, but its shortlist and first-place placements are far smaller than its recommendation total. It is therefore endorsed frequently without often being positioned at the top of an answer.

Positive wording is common, with a modest number of neutral and a few negative mentions. Counts declined against the prior sample while the recommendation rate edged higher. The placement profile, not the recommendation count alone, is what sets this company apart from those ranked above it.

Webull

Questions This Section Answers

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

Webull ranks 5 by recommendation count. Mentions: 423 (71.57%); recommendations: 370 (62.61%). Top 3 placements: 32 (5.41%); first-place placements: 4 (0.68%).

Wording about the company: 376 positive, 43 neutral, 4 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 87.5%. The net framing score was 0.88 (defined in Methodology).

53 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 8.65% were Top 3 and 1.08% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Webull's mention count fell from 493 to 423, while its recommendation count fell from 424 to 370. The recommendation rate was 63.10% and 62.61% respectively.

Webull ranks fifth, appearing in roughly seven of every ten answers and recommended in most of those. Its shortlist placements are limited and first-place placements very rare, so its profile is one of broad but shallow positioning relative to the leaders.

Positive wording dominates its mentions, with few negative references. Mention and recommendation counts were lower than the prior sample while the recommendation rate was essentially flat. That combination is a recorded comparison across differing samples, not a demonstration of stability or decline.

Vanguard

Questions This Section Answers

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

Vanguard ranks 6 by recommendation count. Mentions: 284 (48.05%); recommendations: 233 (39.42%). Top 3 placements: 72 (12.18%); first-place placements: 4 (0.68%).

Wording about the company: 241 positive, 37 neutral, 6 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 82.0%. The net framing score was 0.83 (defined in Methodology).

51 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 30.90% were Top 3 and 1.72% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Vanguard's mention count fell from 317 to 284, while its recommendation count fell from 243 to 233. The recommendation rate was 36.16% and 39.42% respectively.

Vanguard ranks sixth, mentioned in about half of the answers and recommended in a smaller share still. Its shortlist placements are moderate, but first-place placements are rare, so it seldom opens an answer even when endorsed.

Framing is mostly positive with a small neutral and negative tail. Counts were lower than the prior sample while the recommendation rate rose, and the differing samples mean the two observations are reported side by side without a causal reading. Its reach places it clearly below the top five.

Tastytrade

Questions This Section Answers

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

Tastytrade ranks 7 by recommendation count. Mentions: 190 (32.15%); recommendations: 179 (30.29%). Top 3 placements: 50 (8.46%); first-place placements: 38 (6.43%).

Wording about the company: 181 positive, 9 neutral, 0 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 94.2%. The net framing score was 0.95 (defined in Methodology).

11 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 27.93% were Top 3 and 21.23% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Tastytrade's mention count rose from 162 to 190, while its recommendation count rose from 154 to 179. The recommendation rate was 22.92% and 30.29% respectively.

Tastytrade ranks seventh on recommendations but stands out for efficiency: nearly every mention also carries an endorsement, the highest such ratio in the field. Its first-place placements are a meaningful share of its recommendations, giving it a concentrated position profile despite modest overall reach.

Its mentions include no negative wording in this sample. Both mention and recommendation counts rose against the prior sample, and the recommendation rate also increased; with different samples, these are recorded movements rather than established gains.

Public

Questions This Section Answers

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

Public ranks 8 by recommendation count. Mentions: 152 (25.72%); recommendations: 114 (19.29%). Top 3 placements: 9 (1.52%); first-place placements: 2 (0.34%).

Wording about the company: 118 positive, 32 neutral, 2 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 75.0%. The net framing score was 0.76 (defined in Methodology).

38 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 7.89% were Top 3 and 1.75% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Public's mention count rose from 144 to 152, while its recommendation count rose from 112 to 114. The recommendation rate was 16.67% and 19.29% respectively.

Public ranks eighth, appearing in about a quarter of answers and recommended in a smaller share. Its shortlist and first-place placements are minimal, so it is rarely positioned near the top even when endorsed.

Neutral wording forms a larger share of its mentions than for most peers, and its recommendation-to-mention ratio is among the lower ones recorded. Counts rose slightly against the prior sample alongside a higher recommendation rate. The differing samples mean these movements are reported, not attributed.

Merrill Edge

Questions This Section Answers

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

Merrill Edge ranks 9 by recommendation count. Mentions: 88 (14.89%); recommendations: 61 (10.32%). Top 3 placements: 1 (0.17%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 64 positive, 18 neutral, 6 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 69.3%. The net framing score was 0.66 (defined in Methodology).

27 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 1.64% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, Merrill Edge's mention count rose from 78 to 88, while its recommendation count rose from 54 to 61. The recommendation rate was 8.04% and 10.32% respectively.

Merrill Edge ranks ninth, with mentions in a modest minority of answers and recommendations in fewer still. Its shortlist placements are nearly absent and it records no first-place placements in this sample, so its profile is one of limited reach and almost no top positioning.

Neutral and negative wording together form a noticeable share of its mentions, and its recommendation-to-mention ratio is the lowest in the field. Counts rose against the prior sample with a higher recommendation rate; the samples differ, so no cause is inferred.

E*TRADE

Questions This Section Answers

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

E*TRADE ranks 10 by recommendation count. Mentions: 53 (8.97%); recommendations: 49 (8.29%). Top 3 placements: 2 (0.34%); first-place placements: 0 (0.00%).

Wording about the company: 49 positive, 3 neutral, 1 negative mentions. The proportion of mentions that also included a recommendation was 92.5%. The net framing score was 0.91 (defined in Methodology).

4 mentions had no recorded recommendation. Of recorded recommendations, 4.08% were Top 3 and 0.00% were first-place.

From October 2026 to November 2026, E*TRADE's mention count fell from 436 to 53, while its recommendation count fell from 339 to 49. The recommendation rate was 50.45% and 8.29% respectively.

E*TRADE ranks tenth, appearing in a small fraction of answers and recommended in most of those, giving it a high recommendation-to-mention ratio on a sparse base. Its shortlist placements are minimal and it records no first-place placements.

Wording is almost entirely positive. The month-over-month comparison is stark: both mention and recommendation counts are far below the prior sample, and the recommendation rate fell sharply. Because the samples differ, the recorded drop is reported without attributing it to sample size or any other cause.

Earlier ranking snapshot context

Questions This Section Answers

• How do the available Online Stock Brokers 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.

The monthly snapshots come from separate answer samples, so counts and rates are best read together rather than as a continuous series. A company can gain recommendations while its rate moves differently, or hold a rank while its underlying counts shift.

Rank changes across months describe ordering within each sample, not stability of standing. The samples differ in size and composition, and the comparisons show how recorded results changed without establishing why.

What the November Rankings Show

The November results answer several distinct questions. Reach asks how often a broker appeared; recommendation asks how often an answer affirmatively endorsed it; placement asks where within an answer that endorsement sat; framing asks how the wording was classified. Each layer can move independently, which is why a single ranking cannot summarize the field.

Fidelity and Charles Schwab illustrate the point: comparable reach and recommendation totals, very different first-place profiles. Tastytrade shows a high endorsement ratio on a smaller base, while E*TRADE's sparse base makes its ratio fragile. These are descriptions of recorded answer text, not measures of customer behavior or company quality.

Methodology

Questions This Section Answers

• How were the November 2026 Online Stock Brokers 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 July 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.

The benchmark covers a partial set of answers drawn from several AI services, and the exact collection dates are unverified. Each company is counted at most once per qualifying answer, and shortlist and first-place results are subsets of recommendations rather than additions.

Rates use the full benchmark answer total, while the recommendation-to-mention ratio describes answer wording, not conversion. Net framing is a wording balance, not satisfaction. Monthly samples differ, so comparisons show recorded change without establishing cause, and the missing July results are a gap rather than a zero.