IRAs: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index

Tracking how AI platforms recommend iras. This public AI Visibility Market Discovery Index is updated monthly since July 2026.

By Mark Huntley, J.D.Growth Strategist & AI Discovery Analyst

8 minutes read

Get my free AI Company Index Download sample PDF

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: ETRADE
08Largest Decline: Vanguard
09Category Leader: Fidelity
10Recommendation Placement Snapshot
11Buyer-Intent Distribution
12Historical Measurement Record

Benchmark Summary

Questions This Section Answers

Who leads in AI recommendation coverage among IRA providers, and how narrow is the gap between the top two?
Which brands made the largest cumulative coverage moves since the July 2026 baseline?

Fidelity leads the IRAs category with valid recommendation coverage of 87.5% in October 2026, unchanged from 87.5% in July 2026. Charles Schwab holds the second position at 86.5% in October 2026, up from 84.8% in July 2026, a gap of 1.0 percentage point between the two leaders.

No significant category-wide movement occurred this month. Among the largest cumulative shifts since baseline, E*TRADE rose 17.7 percentage points to 46.1% in October 2026 from 28.4% in July 2026, while M1 Finance declined 6.4 percentage points to 8.2% from 14.6% over the same span. Vanguard declined 6.5 percentage points to 62.9% in October 2026 from 69.4% in July 2026. SoFi posted a third consecutive monthly increase, rising to 43.8% in October 2026 from 38.3% in July 2026, a cumulative move that remains within normal month-to-month variation.

The benchmark began with 800 prompt-surface observations in each month and produced 534 qualified observations for October 2026 after qualification.

AI recommendation trend

valid recommendation coverage, Jul 2026 to Oct 2026

Fidelity87.5%
Charles Schwab86.5%
Robinhood76.8%
Vanguard62.9%
E*TRADE46.1%
SoFi43.8%
Betterment LLC23.0%
Merrill Edge13.9%
Wealthfront Corporation10.9%
M1 Finance8.2%
Betterment0.0%
Wealthfront0.0%

Current Benchmark at a Glance

Measure	Jul 2026	Oct 2026	Movement
Qualified benchmark observations	690	534	Down 156
Tracked brands	10	10	No change
Qualified surface breadth	6	6	No change
Recommendation-shaped answer share	46.5%	58.1%	Up 11.6 points
Valid recommendation shortlist share	85.1%	88.8%	Up 3.7 points
Leader by valid recommendation coverage	Fidelity	Fidelity	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. In September 2026, the benchmark produced 520 qualified observations with the same six surface families represented.

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

Research Scope and Qualification

The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design. Brand-level percentages use the qualified observations as the public denominator, not the raw collection.

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.

Request free AI Company Index

Research stage	Jul 2026	Oct 2026	What it represents
Source prompt-surface observations	800	800	Total prompts collected across AI/search surfaces
Unique questions	532	619	Distinct questions after removing duplicates
Brand / competitor mentions	800	800	Prompts mentioning at least one tracked brand
Relevant observations	748	592	On-topic for the IRAs category
Irrelevant observations	52	208	Off-topic or not usable
Qualified benchmark observations	690	534	Public denominator after all qualification

For full details on collection and qualification, see the AI Visibility Market Discovery Methodology.

Current Brand Standings

Questions This Section Answers

Which IRA brands appear most consistently in AI recommendation shortlists?
How do presence rate and valid recommendation coverage differ across the tracked brands?

Brand	Presence rate	Valid recommendation coverage	Top-three rate	Rank-one rate	Net sentiment
Fidelity	99.6%	87.5%	83.3%	56.5%	0.88
Charles Schwab	99.4%	86.5%	78.8%	23.4%	0.87
Robinhood	92.5%	76.8%	24.5%	3.2%	0.83
Vanguard	75.8%	62.9%	37.6%	2.1%	0.83
E*TRADE	58.8%	46.1%	6.6%	0.4%	0.78
SoFi	49.6%	43.8%	7.7%	0.6%	0.89
Betterment LLC	24.2%	23.0%	2.8%	0.4%	0.95
Merrill Edge	19.3%	13.9%	0.8%	0.2%	0.71
Wealthfront Corporation	12.0%	10.9%	0.9%	0.2%	0.91
M1 Finance	10.7%	8.2%	0.8%	0.0%	0.77

How to Read the Standings

Presence rate: Share of qualified observations where the brand is mentioned at all.
Valid recommendation coverage: Share of qualified observations where the brand appears in a valid recommendation shortlist.
Top-three rate: Share of qualified observations where the brand is recommended within the top three positions.
Rank-one rate: Share of qualified observations where the brand is the first recommendation.
Net sentiment: Positive mentions minus negative mentions, divided by total mentions, on a scale from -1 to 1.

For formulas and denominator rules, see AI Visibility Market Discovery Metric Definitions.

Recommendation Coverage Movement

Questions This Section Answers

Which IRA providers gained or lost the most recommendation coverage since the baseline?
Why are Betterment and Wealthfront's earlier coverage numbers not directly comparable to the current readings?

Brand	Jul 2026	Oct 2026	Movement since baseline
Betterment	62.7%	0.0%	Down 62.7 points
Betterment LLC	0.0%	23.0%	Up 23.0 points
Charles Schwab	84.8%	86.5%	Up 1.7 points
E*TRADE	28.4%	46.1%	Up 17.7 points
Fidelity	87.5%	87.5%	No change
M1 Finance	14.6%	8.2%	Down 6.4 points
Merrill Edge	12.0%	13.9%	Up 1.9 points
Robinhood	71.7%	76.8%	Up 5.1 points
SoFi	38.3%	43.8%	Up 5.5 points
Vanguard	69.4%	62.9%	Down 6.5 points
Wealthfront	53.3%	0.0%	Down 53.3 points
Wealthfront Corporation	0.0%	10.9%	Up 10.9 points

Note: The September 2026 measurement introduced a change in the entity labels used to identify two tracked brands. Betterment and Wealthfront values are not directly comparable to earlier months because of the entity label split introduced in September 2026. Betterment appeared under the label Betterment LLC, and Wealthfront appeared under the label Wealthfront Corporation. Their July and August values are shown for continuity, but the label split means earlier points are not directly comparable to the current readings for those two entities.

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.

Request free AI Company Index

Largest Increase: E*TRADE

E*TRADE recorded the largest cumulative coverage gain among continuously tracked brands, rising 17.7 percentage points to 46.1% in October 2026 from 28.4% in July 2026. The move was concentrated in a single month, up from 28.2% in August 2026 to 46.4% in September 2026. Its presence rate climbed alongside, reaching 58.8% in October 2026 from 38.8% in July 2026. The October reading of 46.1% was 0.3 percentage points below the prior month, within normal month-to-month variation.

Largest Decline: Vanguard

Vanguard declined 6.5 percentage points to 62.9% in October 2026 from 69.4% in July 2026. The drop was concentrated in September 2026, falling from 74.1% in August 2026 to 63.8%, and its series has moved down in each of the two months since September 2026. Despite the coverage decline, Vanguard's top-three rate rose to 37.6% in October 2026 from 29.3% in July 2026.

Category Leader: Fidelity

Fidelity remained the category leader, holding valid recommendation coverage of 87.5% in October 2026, unchanged from 87.5% in July 2026. It was present in 99.6% of qualified observations. Fidelity also led on placement, appearing as the first recommendation at a 56.5% rate in October 2026, up from 50.1% in July 2026, and its top-three rate rose to 83.3% from 63.9% over the same span.

Recommendation Placement Snapshot

Questions This Section Answers

How can two IRA brands with nearly equal recommendation coverage differ so much on first-position rate?
Which brands lead on top-three and rank-one placement across the AI surfaces?

Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. Fidelity and Charles Schwab sit within 1.0 percentage point of each other on coverage, yet Fidelity's rank-one rate of 56.5% in October 2026 is substantially higher than Charles Schwab's 23.4%.

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.

Request free AI Company Index

Brand	Oct 2026 top-three rate	Oct 2026 rank-one rate	Jul 2026 top-three rate	Jul 2026 rank-one rate
Fidelity	83.3%	56.5%	63.9%	50.1%
Charles Schwab	78.8%	23.4%	52.3%	9.6%
Robinhood	24.5%	3.2%	15.1%	1.6%

Similar coverage levels can still hide very different first-position rates. Fidelity and Charles Schwab were separated by 1.0 percentage point on coverage in October 2026, while their rank-one rates differed by more than 33 points.

Buyer-Intent Distribution

All qualified observations in both months fell into the brand recommendation class.

Buyer-intent class	Jul 2026	Oct 2026
Brand Recommendation	690	534
Pricing & Value	0	0
Multi-Brand Comparison	0	0
Total qualified observations	690	534

The current public series measures that class of discovery and does not yet contain qualified observations in the empty classes.

Historical Measurement Record

Questions This Section Answers

Has the coverage leader changed across the four months of measurement?
Which month recorded the largest single brand coverage movement?

Measurement	Qualified observations	Coverage leader	Leader coverage	Largest coverage movement
Jul 2026	690	Fidelity	87.5%	Wealthfront down 7.8 points
Aug 2026	638	Fidelity	89.0%	Wealthfront down 7.8 points
Sep 2026	520	Fidelity	86.4%	E*TRADE up 18.2 points
Oct 2026	534	Fidelity	87.5%	E*TRADE up 17.7 points

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.

Scope Boundaries

This public benchmark does not measure:

Market share or sales attribution for any brand.
Every possible AI response, across all surfaces and all phrasings.
Organic-search ranking performance.
Social media mention volume.
Private or sponsored channels where AI responses are not publicly observable.
Causality from a metric movement alone; the benchmark records change but does not establish why it occurred.

Top 10 Cited Domains

Questions This Section Answers

Which domains are cited most often across AI platform responses for IRA queries?
How did the citation share distribute across the top 10 domains?

Across all AI platform responses in this measurement period, 6,112 citations were observed across 785 unique domains.

Rank	Domain	Citations	Share	Platforms citing
1	nerdwallet.com	564	9.2%	chatgpt, copilot, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
2	investopedia.com	396	6.5%	chatgpt, copilot, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
3	youtube.com	342	5.6%	gemini, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
4	google.com	295	4.8%	google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords
5	reddit.com	256	4.2%	chatgpt, gemini, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
6	fool.com	239	3.9%	chatgpt, copilot, gemini, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
7	forbes.com	236	3.9%	chatgpt, copilot, gemini, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
8	cnbc.com	200	3.3%	chatgpt, copilot, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
9	finance.yahoo.com	200	3.3%	chatgpt, copilot, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity
10	fidelity.com	196	3.2%	chatgpt, copilot, gemini, google_ai_mode, google_ai_mode_keywords, google_ai_overviews, google_ai_overviews_keywords, perplexity

Citations are broadly distributed, with the top 10 domains accounting for roughly 48% of all citations across 785 unique domains. No single domain dominates the information environment.

One tracked brand's own domain appears in the top 10: fidelity.com ranks tenth with 196 citations, cited across all eight platform IDs. The leading sources are consumer finance publishers and review sites such as nerdwallet.com and investopedia.com, alongside general interest and news outlets including youtube.com, forbes.com, and cnbc.com.

About This Benchmark

The LLM Authority Index AI Visibility Market Discovery Index tracks how AI assistants surface and recommend brands across six canonical AI/search surface families. Each month, a fresh set of prompt observations is collected, qualified, and measured to show where each tracked brand stands.

Get a Company-Level Authority Index

The public industry benchmark shows category-level standings. A company-level Authority Index can go deeper.

Get my free AI Company Index

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.

Request free AI Company Index