Contract Management Software: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index
Tracking how AI platforms recommend contract management software. This public AI Visibility Market Discovery Index is updated monthly since July 2026.
On this page
- 01Benchmark Summary
- 02Current Benchmark at a Glance
- 03Research Scope and Qualification
- 04Current Brand Standings
- 05How to Read the Standings
- 06Recommendation Coverage Movement
- 07Largest Increase: Juro
- 08Largest Decline: Icertis
- 09Category Leader: DocuSign
- 10Recommendation Placement Snapshot
- 11Buyer-Intent Distribution
- 12Historical Measurement Record
Benchmark Summary
Questions This Section Answers
- Who leads the Contract Management Software benchmark, and what is the coverage gap with the next brand?
- Which brands recorded the largest coverage increase and decline this month?
- How does the July to October 2026 series describe the overall market movement?
DocuSign led the Contract Management Software benchmark in October 2026 with valid recommendation coverage of 60.7%, ahead of PandaDoc at 50.1%, a gap of 10.6 points. The largest coverage increase belonged to Juro, which moved from 13.9% in September 2026 to 19.8% in October 2026, a rise of 5.9 points. The largest coverage decline belonged to Icertis, which fell from 19.7% in September 2026 to 18.3% in October 2026, a decline of 1.4 points. Against the July 2026 baseline, two brands recorded significant declines: Icertis, down 11.2 points from 29.5%, and LinkSquares, down 7.4 points from 20.9%. The month's movement was otherwise within normal variation.
Across the full July 2026 to October 2026 series, the headline movement remains the August 2026 contraction, when every brand's coverage fell sharply, followed by a broad recovery in September 2026 and continued stabilization in October 2026. DocuSign and PandaDoc each rose in both September 2026 and October 2026, a two-month streak. Icertis and LinkSquares have not recovered to their July 2026 baseline levels. The benchmark began with 800 prompt-surface observations in each month of the series and produced 481 qualified observations in October 2026 after qualification.
AI recommendation trend
valid recommendation coverage, Jul 2026 to Oct 2026
- DocuSign60.7%
- PandaDoc50.1%
- Ironclad38.9%
- Agiloft20.6%
- Juro19.8%
- Conga18.3%
- Icertis18.3%
- ContractSafe18.1%
- LinkSquares13.5%
- ContractWorks6.9%
Current Benchmark at a Glance
Measure | Jul 2026 | Oct 2026 | Movement |
|---|---|---|---|
Qualified benchmark observations | 468 | 481 | Up 13 |
Tracked brands | 10 | 10 | No change |
Qualified surface breadth | 6 | 6 | No change |
Recommendation-shaped answer share | 42.9% | 59.3% | Up 16.4 points |
Valid recommendation shortlist share | 67.5% | 70.3% | Up 2.8 points |
Leader by valid recommendation coverage | DocuSign | DocuSign | No change |
Qualified surface breadth counts the canonical AI/search surface families with at least one qualified observation: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode. Both July 2026 and October 2026 recorded qualified observations across all six families.
Want the full Authority Index
The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.
For the strategic interpretation of this benchmark, read CiteWorks Studio's analysis of How AI Search Is Recommending Contract Management Software
Research Scope and Qualification
Questions This Section Answers
- Why are brand-level percentages based on a narrower set of qualified observations rather than all 800 prompts?
- How many prompt-surface observations qualified for the benchmark in October 2026?
The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design.
Research stage | Jul 2026 | Oct 2026 | What it represents |
|---|---|---|---|
Source prompt-surface observations | 800 | 800 | Total prompts collected |
Unique questions | 463 | 546 | Distinct question phrasings |
Brand / competitor mentions | 800 | 800 | Prompts mentioning a tracked brand |
Relevant observations | 742 | 715 | On-topic for the vertical |
Irrelevant observations | 58 | 85 | Off-topic for the vertical |
Qualified benchmark observations | 468 | 481 | Public denominator |
Brand-level percentages use the qualified observations as the public denominator, not the raw collection. Learn more in the AI Visibility Market Discovery Methodology.
Current Brand Standings
Questions This Section Answers
- Which brands rank highest, and how far ahead is the leader on valid recommendation coverage?
- How do presence rate, top-three rate, rank-one rate, and net sentiment differ across the rankings?
Brand | Presence rate | Valid recommendation coverage | Top-three rate | Rank-one rate | Net sentiment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DocuSign | 92.1% | 60.7% | 44.3% | 23.3% | 0.7 |
PandaDoc | 65.3% | 50.1% | 33.3% | 10.4% | 0.8 |
Ironclad | 55.5% | 38.9% | 28.3% | 15.2% | 0.7 |
Agiloft | 28.9% | 20.6% | 4.6% | 0.4% | 0.8 |
Juro | 23.7% | 19.8% | 6.9% | 1.2% | 0.9 |
Conga | 26.8% | 18.3% | 7.7% | 0.6% | 0.7 |
Icertis | 34.3% | 18.3% | 8.3% | 2.1% | 0.6 |
ContractSafe | 21.4% | 18.1% | 7.7% | 4.2% | 0.9 |
LinkSquares | 18.9% | 13.5% | 1.5% | 0.0% | 0.7 |
ContractWorks | 9.8% | 6.9% | 2.1% | 0.2% | 0.8 |
How to Read the Standings
- Presence rate is the share of qualified observations where the brand is mentioned at all in the AI answer.
- Valid recommendation coverage is the share of qualified observations where the brand receives a bona fide recommendation, excluding passing mentions.
- Top-three rate is the share of qualified observations where the brand appears in a recommended shortlist's top three.
- Rank-one rate is the share of qualified observations where the brand is the single first recommendation.
- Net sentiment is the share of positive minus negative mentions among all sentiment-bearing mentions, from 0 to 1.
For formulas and denominator rules, see AI Visibility Market Discovery Metric Definitions.
Recommendation Coverage Movement
Questions This Section Answers
- Which brands moved most against their July 2026 baseline?
- How have Icertis and LinkSquares trended since their July 2026 levels?
Brand | Jul 2026 | Oct 2026 | Movement since baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
Agiloft | 25.0% | 20.6% | Down 4.4 points |
Conga | 15.4% | 18.3% | Up 2.9 points |
ContractSafe | 18.6% | 18.1% | Down 0.5 points |
ContractWorks | 7.7% | 6.9% | Down 0.8 points |
DocuSign | 56.4% | 60.7% | Up 4.3 points |
Icertis | 29.5% | 18.3% | Down 11.2 points |
Ironclad | 43.2% | 38.9% | Down 4.3 points |
Juro | 16.7% | 19.8% | Up 3.1 points |
LinkSquares | 20.9% | 13.5% | Down 7.4 points |
PandaDoc | 47.6% | 50.1% | Up 2.5 points |
Want the full Authority Index
The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.
The largest prior-to-current move belonged to Juro, up 5.9 points from 13.9% in September 2026 to 19.8% in October 2026. DocuSign rose 4.7 points from 56.0% in September 2026 to 60.7% in October 2026, and PandaDoc rose 2.8 points from 47.3% to 50.1% over the same period. Eight of ten brands have risen in each of the two months since August 2026.
Largest Increase: Juro
Juro recorded the largest prior-to-current coverage increase, rising 5.9 points from 13.9% valid recommendation coverage in September 2026 to 19.8% in October 2026. Against the July 2026 baseline, Juro is up 3.1 points from 16.7%. The top-three rate moved from 4.5% in July 2026 to 6.9% in October 2026, and the rank-one rate moved from 0.4% to 1.2% over the same period. Juro's 19.8% coverage in October 2026 represented 95 valid recommendations from 481 qualified observations.
Largest Decline: Icertis
Icertis recorded a significant coverage decline against baseline, falling 11.2 points from 29.5% valid recommendation coverage in July 2026 to 18.3% in October 2026. Top-three rate fell from 15.0% to 8.3%, and rank-one rate fell from 6.2% to 2.1% across the same period. Presence rate also declined from 40.6% to 34.3%. Icertis's 29.5% coverage in July 2026 represented 138 valid recommendations from 468 qualified observations, and its 18.3% in October 2026 represented 88 valid recommendations from 481 qualified observations.
Category Leader: DocuSign
DocuSign was the coverage leader in both July 2026 and October 2026, rising from 56.4% to 60.7%, a change of 4.3 points. DocuSign also led on presence rate, top-three rate, and rank-one rate in October 2026, holding the top position across every placement measure. PandaDoc, the second-largest brand by coverage, held the second position on presence rate and top-three rate but a lower rank-one rate than Ironclad, which recorded 15.2%.
Want the full Authority Index
The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.
Recommendation Placement Snapshot
Questions This Section Answers
- Why does placement order the leading brands differently than coverage alone?
- How did top-three and rank-one rates shift for DocuSign, PandaDoc, and Ironclad?
Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. Among the top brands by valid recommendation coverage, placement rates reveal a different ordering.
Brand | Oct 2026 top-three rate | Oct 2026 rank-one rate | Jul 2026 top-three rate | Jul 2026 rank-one rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DocuSign | 44.3% | 23.3% | 35.3% | 16.2% |
PandaDoc | 33.3% | 10.4% | 24.6% | 6.2% |
Ironclad | 28.3% | 15.2% | 35.7% | 23.1% |
DocuSign's top-three rate and rank-one rate both rose against baseline, up 9.0 points and 7.1 points respectively. PandaDoc's rank-one rate rose 4.2 points from 6.2% to 10.4%. Ironclad's top-three rate and rank-one rate both declined against baseline, down 7.4 points and 7.9 points. Close coverage figures can still hide markedly different first-position rates.
Buyer-Intent Distribution
Questions This Section Answers
- What class of discovery do the qualified observations cover?
- Which buyer-intent classes are absent from the current public benchmark?
In both the baseline and current months, the qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation class of discovery.
Buyer-intent class | Jul 2026 | Oct 2026 |
|---|---|---|
Brand Recommendation | 468 | 481 |
Pricing & Value | 0 | 0 |
Multi-Brand Comparison | 0 | 0 |
Total qualified observations | 468 | 481 |
The current public series measures brand recommendation discovery only. It does not yet contain qualified observations in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison classes.
Historical Measurement Record
Measurement | Qualified observations | Coverage leader | Leader coverage | Largest coverage movement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Jul 2026 | 468 | DocuSign | 56.4% | DocuSign, down 43.2 points to Aug |
Aug 2026 | 453 | PandaDoc | 13.7% | DocuSign, down 43.2 points from Jul |
Sep 2026 | 482 | DocuSign | 56.0% | Agiloft, down 9.2 points from Jul |
Oct 2026 | 481 | DocuSign | 60.7% | Juro, up 5.9 points from Sep |
Evidence and Source Layer
The benchmark is built from prompt-level observations that retain the query, AI/search surface, answer, brand outcome, recommendation placement, sentiment, and, where exposed, citations or attributable evidence sources. Source presence is evidence about the information environment. It is not automatically proof that the source caused the recommendation.
Want the full Authority Index
The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.
Scope Boundaries
This public benchmark does not measure market share, attributable sales, every possible AI response, organic-search ranking, social mention volume, private or sponsored channels, or causality from a metric movement alone.
Top 10 Cited Domains
Questions This Section Answers
- Which domains are cited most often in AI platform responses, and how widely cited are they?
- How much of the citation environment is controlled by tracked brands' own sites?
Across all AI platform responses in October 2026, the benchmark recorded 6,243 citations across 1,061 unique domains.
Rank | Domain | Citations | Share | Platforms citing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | youtube.com | 409 | 6.6% | Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
2 | pandadoc.com | 341 | 5.5% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
3 | docusign.com | 316 | 5.1% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
4 | google.com | 234 | 3.7% | AI Mode, AI Overviews |
5 | reddit.com | 158 | 2.5% | ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
6 | gartner.com | 154 | 2.5% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
7 | sirion.ai | 142 | 2.3% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
8 | icertis.com | 140 | 2.2% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews |
9 | g2.com | 110 | 1.8% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
10 | ironcladapp.com | 97 | 1.6% | ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity |
Citations are distributed across a long tail of 1,061 domains, but the top ten account for a meaningful share of the total. Three of the top ten domains belong to tracked brands: pandadoc.com, docusign.com, and icertis.com, alongside ironcladapp.com at rank ten. Official brand sites appear alongside general knowledge sources, a large video platform, community forums, and a technology research firm, with review sites present but not dominant in the top ten.
About This Benchmark
The LLM Authority Index AI Visibility Market Discovery Index tracks how often and how prominently contract management software brands surface across major AI and search surfaces in response to real buyer-style queries. The benchmark is rebuilt monthly from a consistent, documented research protocol.
- AI Visibility Market Discovery Methodology
- AI Visibility Market Discovery Metric Definitions
- AI Visibility Market Discovery Research Standards
- Modeled AI Visibility Authority Value
Get a Company-Level Authority Index
The public industry benchmark shows category-level standings. A company-level Authority Index can go deeper.
Want the full Authority Index
The paid deep-dive adds competitor threat profiles, the gap matrix, citation failure map, platform-by-platform recovery roadmap, and client-specific economic modeling.
Keep reading
Related posts
Industry Reports
Expense Management Software: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
ReadIndustry Reports
Document Management Software: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
ReadIndustry Reports
Inventory Management Software: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
Read