Long-Term Care Insurance: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index

Benchmark Summary

Questions This Section Answers

• Which long-term care insurance brand leads the benchmark in October 2026, and by how much?
• Did any brand post a significant recommendation coverage change this month?
• Which brands have risen or fallen most since the August 2026 baseline?

New York Life leads the Long-Term Care Insurance benchmark in October 2026 with 67.7% valid recommendation coverage, a 1.2 percentage point advantage over second-place Mutual of Omaha. No brand recorded a significant change in valid recommendation coverage between September 2026 and October 2026; the month was stable, leaving the pattern established over the prior two months unchanged.

Across the full series since the August 2026 baseline, Transamerica is the only significant riser, climbing to 19.6% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026 from 3.1% in August 2026, continuing an increase that has now extended for two consecutive months. Nationwide is the largest significant decliner, falling to 53.1% from 75.5%, followed by National Guardian Life (down to 11.5% from 31.6%) and Mutual of Omaha (down to 66.5% from 79.6%); each of the three declining brands has now fallen for two consecutive months. New York Life, the category leader, moved from 73.5% in August 2026 to 67.7% in October 2026, a change that remains within normal month-to-month variation throughout the series.

The benchmark began with 800 prompt-surface observations in each month and produced 98 qualified observations in August 2026 and 260 qualified observations in October 2026 after qualification.

Current Benchmark at a Glance

Qualified surface breadth counts the number of canonical AI/search surface families, out of six total, that produced at least one qualified observation. The six families are ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode. September 2026 was an intermediate month in the series; qualified observations reached 216 that month.

For the strategic interpretation of this benchmark, read CiteWorks Studio's analysis of How AI Search Is Recommending Long-Term Care Insurance

Research Scope and Qualification

Questions This Section Answers

• How many prompt-surface observations were collected, and how many qualified for the public benchmark?
• Why do brand-level percentages use qualified observations rather than the raw collection?

The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design. The table below shows how observations were filtered through the research pipeline.

Brand-level percentages use the qualified observations as the public denominator, not the raw collection. Link AI Market Discovery Methodology.

Current Brand Standings

Questions This Section Answers

• Which long-term care insurance brands had the strongest recommendation coverage in October 2026?
• How do presence rate, valid recommendation coverage, and top-three and rank-one rates differ across the tracked brands?

This table is the primary current-month benchmark view, covering October 2026.

How to Read the Standings

• Presence rate: Share of qualified benchmark observations in which the brand was mentioned at all, regardless of whether it was recommended.
• Valid recommendation coverage: Share of qualified benchmark observations in which the brand received a valid recommendation within the answer.
• Top-three rate: Share of qualified benchmark observations in which the brand appeared in the first three recommended positions.
• Rank-one rate: Share of qualified benchmark observations in which the brand was the first or primary recommendation.
• Net sentiment: Positive mentions minus negative mentions, divided by total mentions, producing a score between -1 and 1.

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

Recommendation Coverage Movement

Questions This Section Answers

• Which long-term care insurance brands declined most since the baseline month?
• What drove Transamerica's increase in valid recommendation coverage?
• Did New York Life's decline fall within normal month-to-month variation?

The table below tracks valid recommendation coverage from the baseline month (August 2026) to the current month (October 2026).

Largest Increase: Transamerica

Transamerica moved from 3.1% valid recommendation coverage in August 2026 to 19.6% in October 2026, a significant rise of 16.5 points that grew in each of the two months since baseline. The increase continued from the prior month, adding 2.0 points over September 2026. Presence rose from 4.1% of observations in August 2026 to 23.8% in October 2026, and top-three placement climbed from 2.0% to 13.5%. Rank-one placement reached 1.1% in October 2026 from 0.0% in August 2026.

Largest Decline: Nationwide

Nationwide fell 22.4 points, from 75.5% valid recommendation coverage in August 2026 to 53.1% in October 2026, the largest decline in the benchmark and a significant one. The decline extended across both months since baseline, easing only slightly from the prior month with a 2.0 point drop over September 2026. Presence fell from 90.8% in August 2026 to 61.5% in October 2026, and top-three placement dropped from 67.3% to 35.0%. Rank-one placement rose to 7.3% in October 2026 from 4.1% in August 2026.

Decline Beyond Normal Variation: Mutual of Omaha

Mutual of Omaha declined to 66.5% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026 from 79.6% in August 2026, a significant 13.1 point drop that continued across both months since baseline. Presence fell from 99.0% in August 2026 to 76.1% in October 2026, and top-three placement fell from 77.5% to 49.6%. Rank-one placement dropped from 56.1% to 29.6%, though Mutual of Omaha still held the highest first-position rate among tracked brands.

Decline Beyond Normal Variation: National Guardian Life

National Guardian Life declined to 11.5% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026 from 31.6% in August 2026, a significant 20.1 point drop that continued across both months since baseline. Presence fell from 35.7% in August 2026 to 11.5% in October 2026, and top-three placement fell from 10.2% to 3.5%. Rank-one placement edged up to 0.8% in October 2026 from 0.0% in August 2026.

Category Leader: New York Life

New York Life holds the category lead with 67.7% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026, down from 73.5% in August 2026. The 5.8 point decline is within normal month-to-month variation, and the brand declined in each of the two months since baseline. Presence was 80.4% in October 2026 versus 88.8% in August 2026, while top-three placement rose to 51.9% from 46.9%. Rank-one placement rose to 6.9% from 4.1%.

Other movers within normal variation included Northwestern Mutual (down to 50.8% in October 2026 from 56.1% in August 2026, though up 3.6 points from the prior month), Lincoln Financial (up to 12.7% from 12.2%), Thrivent (down to 6.9% from 9.2%), and Genworth (down to 0.8% from 1.0%).

Recommendation Placement Snapshot

Questions This Section Answers

• How can brands with similar coverage rates have very different first-position rates?
• What is the first-choice gap between New York Life and Mutual of Omaha?

Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. The leading brands show distinct placement profiles. New York Life led on coverage, while Mutual of Omaha held a substantially higher first-position rate.

Similar coverage rates can still hide different first-position rates. New York Life and Mutual of Omaha were within 1.2 percentage points on coverage in October 2026, yet Mutual of Omaha held a 29.6% rank-one rate versus 6.9% for New York Life, a 22.7 point first-choice gap.

Buyer-Intent Distribution

All qualified observations in both August 2026 and October 2026 fell into the Brand Recommendation class, meaning consumers or researchers at the discovery and consideration stage seeking named long-term care insurance providers.

The current public series measures brand recommendation discovery only; pricing, value, and head-to-head comparison questions have no public signal in this data.

Historical Measurement Record

This is an evergreen benchmark URL. New measurements are added to the same report.

Evidence and Source Layer

Questions This Section Answers

• What data does each prompt-level observation capture?
• Does citation or source presence prove a source caused an AI recommendation?

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 attributable to any brand
• Every possible AI response across all models, versions, or user configurations
• Organic search engine ranking performance
• Social media mention volume or sentiment
• Private, gated, or sponsored AI channels
• Causality from a metric movement alone

The current dataset cannot answer pricing, value, or multi-brand comparison questions, and single-month movements should not yet be treated as established trends.

Top 10 Cited Domains

Questions This Section Answers

• Which domains were cited most often across AI platform responses in this measurement period?
• Are citations concentrated in a few domains or broadly distributed across many?
• What types of sources shape the external information environment for this category?

Across all AI platform responses in this measurement period, 6,578 citations were observed across 849 unique domains.

Citations are broadly distributed rather than concentrated in a few domains: the top 10 domains together account for a modest share of the 6,578 total citations, and 849 unique domains were cited overall. No tracked brand's own domain appears in the top 10. Financial comparison and review sites, including nerdwallet.com, policygenius.com, ethos.com, and moneygeek.com, sit alongside general news and business outlets such as cnbc.com, forbes.com, and wsj.com, indicating that both specialist insurance resources and mainstream financial coverage shape the external information environment in this vertical.

About This Benchmark

The LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery Index is a neutral, category-level benchmark that measures how AI search and chat surfaces present brands in response to consumer and business research questions. The index tracks presence, recommendation coverage, placement, and sentiment on a consistent, audited basis across six canonical AI surface families.

• 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.

Get my free AI Company Index