IVF Clinics: AI Market Discovery Index
Tracking how AI platforms recommend ivf clinics. This public AI 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 Decline: CCRM Fertility
- 08Category Leader: CCRM Fertility
- 09Recommendation Placement Snapshot
- 10Buyer-Intent Distribution
- 11Historical Measurement Record
- 12Evidence and Source Layer
Benchmark Summary
CCRM Fertility led valid recommendation coverage in August 2026 at 29.2%, down from 37.5% in Jul 2026. The gap to the second-place brand narrowed: Shady Grove Fertility held 21.3% in August 2026, up from 26.3% in Jul 2026, leaving a spread of 7.9 percentage points between the two leaders.
The largest coverage increase came from Pacific Fertility Center, which rose to 6.3% in August 2026 from 5.8% in Jul 2026. The largest coverage decline was CCRM Fertility, falling 8.3 points, a move beyond normal month-to-month variation.
The benchmark began with 483 prompt-surface observations in August 2026 and produced 315 qualified observations after qualification.
AI recommendation trend
valid recommendation coverage, Jul 2026 to Aug 2026
- CCRM Fertility-8.3% · beyond normal variationJul 202637.5%Aug 202629.2%
- Shady Grove Fertility-5.0%Jul 202626.3%Aug 202621.3%
- RMA Network-2.5%Jul 202618.1%Aug 202615.6%
- Columbia University Fertility Center-2.9%Jul 202616.9%Aug 202614.0%
- Kindbody-4.6%Jul 202614.4%Aug 20269.8%
- Pacific Fertility Center+0.5%Jul 20265.8%Aug 20266.3%
- Spring Fertility-3.5%Jul 20268.6%Aug 20265.1%
- Boston IVF+0.7%Jul 20262.5%Aug 20263.2%
- Extend Fertility-0.5%Jul 20262.1%Aug 20261.6%
- US Fertility-0.5%Jul 20260.8%Aug 20260.3%
Current Benchmark at a Glance
Measure | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 | Movement |
|---|---|---|---|
Qualified benchmark observations | 243 | 315 | Up 72 |
Tracked brands | 10 | 10 | No change |
Qualified surface breadth | 6 | 6 | No change |
Recommendation-shaped answer share | 30.9% | 27.0% | Down 3.9 points |
Valid recommendation shortlist share | 45.3% | 40.0% | Down 5.3 points |
Leader by valid recommendation coverage | CCRM Fertility | CCRM Fertility | No change |
Qualified surface breadth counts the canonical AI surface families with at least one qualified observation: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode.
For the strategic interpretation of this benchmark, read CiteWorks Studio's analysis of How AI Search Is Recommending IVF Clinics
Research Scope and Qualification
The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design. The table below shows how observations progressed from raw collection to the qualified benchmark denominator.
Research stage | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 | What it represents |
|---|---|---|---|
Source prompt-surface observations | 356 | 483 | Total prompts collected across AI surfaces |
Unique questions | 299 | 391 | Distinct questions after deduplication |
Brand / competitor mentions | 356 | 483 | Prompts containing brand or competitor names |
Relevant observations | 301 | 418 | On-topic observations for the IVF Clinics vertical |
Irrelevant observations | 55 | 65 | Off-topic observations excluded from analysis |
Qualified benchmark observations | 243 | 315 | Public denominator for all brand-level metrics |
Brand-level percentages use the qualified observations as the public denominator, not the raw collection. See the AI Market Discovery Methodology for full details.
Current Brand Standings
Brand | Presence rate | Valid recommendation coverage | Top-three rate | Rank-one rate | Net sentiment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CCRM Fertility | 51.7% | 29.2% | 20.9% | 14.3% | 0.61 |
Shady Grove Fertility | 45.4% | 21.3% | 15.2% | 2.2% | 0.50 |
RMA Network | 28.6% | 15.6% | 6.3% | 0.6% | 0.57 |
Columbia University Fertility Center | 15.6% | 14.0% | 10.8% | 7.9% | 0.94 |
Kindbody | 18.7% | 9.8% | 6.0% | 0.3% | 0.53 |
Pacific Fertility Center | 21.6% | 6.3% | 4.4% | 2.2% | 0.31 |
Spring Fertility | 7.3% | 5.1% | 3.5% | 0.6% | 0.70 |
Boston IVF | 8.6% | 3.2% | 0.9% | 0.0% | 0.37 |
US Fertility | 1.3% | 0.3% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 0.50 |
Extend Fertility | 10.8% | 1.6% | 0.6% | 0.6% | 0.18 |
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.
How to Read the Standings
Presence rate measures how often a brand appears in AI responses, regardless of context. Valid recommendation coverage measures the share of qualified observations where the brand receives a clear recommendation. Top-three rate measures the share where the brand appears among the first three recommended options. Rank-one rate measures the share where the brand is the single top recommendation. Net sentiment reflects the balance of positive versus negative framing in mentions. For formulas and denominator rules, see AI Market Discovery Metric Definitions.
Recommendation Coverage Movement
Brand | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 | Movement since baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
Boston IVF | 2.5% | 3.2% | Up 0.7 points |
CCRM Fertility | 37.5% | 29.2% | Down 8.3 points |
Columbia University Fertility Center | 16.9% | 14.0% | Down 2.9 points |
Extend Fertility | 2.1% | 1.6% | Down 0.5 points |
Kindbody | 14.4% | 9.8% | Down 4.6 points |
Pacific Fertility Center | 5.8% | 6.3% | Up 0.5 points |
RMA Network | 18.1% | 15.6% | Down 2.5 points |
Shady Grove Fertility | 26.3% | 21.3% | Down 5.0 points |
Spring Fertility | 8.6% | 5.1% | Down 3.5 points |
US Fertility | 0.8% | 0.3% | Down 0.5 points |
Largest Decline: CCRM Fertility
CCRM Fertility saw valid recommendation coverage fall to 29.2% in August 2026 from 37.5% in Jul 2026, a decline of 8.3 percentage points that exceeds normal month-to-month variation. Presence rate also declined to 51.7% in August 2026 from 67.9% in Jul 2026. Despite the decline, CCRM Fertility remained the category leader.
Category Leader: CCRM Fertility
CCRM Fertility held the top valid recommendation coverage for the second consecutive month at 29.2% in August 2026. The gap to Shady Grove Fertility narrowed to 7.9 percentage points, down from 11.2 points in Jul 2026. CCRM Fertility also led both top-three rate at 20.9% and rank-one rate at 14.3% in August 2026.
Recommendation Placement Snapshot
Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. The table below shows how often leading brands appear in top-three and first position.
Brand | Aug 2026 top-three rate | Aug 2026 rank-one rate | Jul 2026 top-three rate | Jul 2026 rank-one rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CCRM Fertility | 20.9% | 14.3% | 26.8% | 16.9% |
Shady Grove Fertility | 15.2% | 2.2% | 18.5% | 2.1% |
Columbia University Fertility Center | 10.8% | 7.9% | 14.0% | 10.7% |
Similar coverage levels can still hide different first-position rates. Columbia University Fertility Center ranked first in 7.9% of observations, more than three times the rate of Shady Grove Fertility at 2.2%, despite Shady Grove Fertility holding higher overall coverage.
Buyer-Intent Distribution
In both Jul 2026 and Aug 2026, all qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation class.
Buyer-intent class | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 |
|---|---|---|
Brand Recommendation | 243 | 315 |
Pricing & Value | 0 | 0 |
Multi-Brand Comparison | 0 | 0 |
Total qualified observations | 243 | 315 |
The current public series measures brand-recommendation discovery and does not yet contain qualified observations in the pricing and comparison classes.
Historical Measurement Record
Measurement | Qualified observations | Coverage leader | Leader coverage | Largest coverage movement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Jul 2026 | 243 | CCRM Fertility | 37.5% | CCRM Fertility (baseline) |
Aug 2026 | 315 | CCRM Fertility | 29.2% | CCRM Fertility down 8.3 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, attributable sales, every possible AI response, organic-search ranking, social mention volume, private or sponsored channels, or causality from a metric movement alone. Observed changes may reflect shifts in AI model behavior, prompt composition, or broader information dynamics.
About This Benchmark
The LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery Index tracks how AI search and chat surfaces present brands across a vertical, measuring presence, recommendation coverage, placement, and sentiment in response to real buyer questions. The benchmark is released monthly and accumulates into a growing public record.
- AI Market Discovery Methodology
- AI Market Discovery Metric Definitions
- AI Market Discovery Research Standards
- Modeled AI 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
TRT Clinics: AI Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
ReadIndustry Reports
Fertility Clinics: AI Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
ReadIndustry Reports
Revenue Cycle Management: AI Market Discovery Index
Read this blog on LLM Authority Index.
Read