Online Dating: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index

Tracking how AI platforms recommend online dating. This public AI Visibility Market Discovery Index is updated monthly since August 2026.

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

7 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: OkCupid
08Largest Increase: Plenty of Fish
09Largest Decline: Coffee Meets Bagel
10Category Leader: Hinge
11Recommendation Placement Snapshot
12Buyer-Intent Distribution

Benchmark Summary

Hinge remained the coverage leader in the Online Dating benchmark in October 2026, with valid recommendation coverage of 82.0%, ahead of Bumble at 78.6% and OkCupid at 70.5%. The gap between Hinge and Bumble stood at 3.4 percentage points.

The largest coverage increase since baseline came from OkCupid, which rose to 70.5% in October 2026 from 61.7% in August 2026, a movement beyond normal month-to-month variation. The largest coverage decline came from Coffee Meets Bagel, which fell to 21.4% in October 2026 from 26.0% in August 2026, also beyond normal variation.

October 2026 was a mixed month. Seven brands held stable positions, two rose significantly, and one declined significantly. Several stable brands posted notable prior-month moves, including Hinge (74.6% in September 2026 to 82.0% in October 2026), Bumble (71.6% to 78.6%), Match (45.5% to 52.0%), and Tinder (63.4% to 69.5%), each beyond normal variation from the prior month.

The benchmark began with 800 prompt-surface observations in each of the three months and produced 702 qualified observations in October 2026 after qualification.

AI recommendation trend

valid recommendation coverage, Aug 2026 to Oct 2026

Hinge82.0%
Bumble78.6%
OkCupid70.5%
Tinder69.5%
Match52.0%
eharmony51.6%
Grindr35.3%
HER32.5%
Plenty of Fish28.8%
Coffee Meets Bagel21.4%

Current Benchmark at a Glance

Measure	Aug 2026	Oct 2026	Movement
Qualified benchmark observations	716	702	Down 14
Tracked brands	10	10	No change
Qualified surface breadth	6	6	No change
Recommendation-shaped answer share	44.3%	63.5%	Up 19.2 points
Valid recommendation shortlist share	81.8%	89.7%	Up 7.9 points
Leader by valid recommendation coverage	Hinge	Hinge	No change

Qualified surface breadth counts the number of canonical AI surface families with at least one qualified observation across six families: 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 Online Dating

Research Scope and Qualification

Questions This Section Answers

How many prompts and observations qualified for the public Online Dating benchmark?
Why is the qualified benchmark denominator smaller than the raw collection universe?

The public benchmark is narrower than the raw collection universe by design.

Research stage	Aug 2026	Oct 2026	What it represents
Source prompt-surface observations	800	800	Total prompts issued to AI/search surfaces
Unique questions	520	549	Distinct questions after deduplication
Brand / competitor mentions	800	800	Prompts naming at least one brand or competitor
Relevant observations	794	786	On-topic responses retained for analysis
Irrelevant observations	6	14	Off-topic responses excluded from analysis
Qualified benchmark observations	716	702	Public denominator for brand-level metrics

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

Current Brand Standings

Questions This Section Answers

Which dating brands lead the October 2026 recommendation standings?
How do presence rate and valid recommendation coverage differ across the tracked brands?

Sorted by valid recommendation coverage in October 2026.

Brand	Presence rate	Valid recommendation coverage	Top-three rate	Rank-one rate	Net sentiment
Hinge	97.6%	82.0%	54.3%	31.3%	0.9
Bumble	97.9%	78.6%	35.9%	1.1%	0.8
OkCupid	81.8%	70.5%	18.9%	3.6%	0.9
Tinder	94.2%	69.5%	37.5%	12.4%	0.7
Match	63.8%	52.0%	16.7%	5.6%	0.8
eharmony	60.4%	51.6%	14.0%	2.7%	0.8
Grindr	43.2%	35.3%	2.3%	1.1%	0.8
HER	37.9%	32.5%	2.4%	1.4%	0.9
Plenty of Fish	40.2%	28.8%	10.4%	5.7%	0.7
Coffee Meets Bagel	25.6%	21.4%	1.1%	0.0%	0.9

How to Read the Standings

Presence rate: the share of qualified observations in which the brand is mentioned at all.
Valid recommendation coverage: the share of qualified observations in which the brand appears in a valid recommendation shortlist.
Top-three rate: the share of qualified observations in which the brand appears among the top three recommended options.
Rank-one rate: the share of qualified observations in which the brand is the first-named recommendation.
Net sentiment: positive minus negative mention tone, scaled to a 0 to 1 range.

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

Recommendation Coverage Movement

Questions This Section Answers

Which dating brands posted the largest coverage gains since the August 2026 baseline?
Which brand saw the largest drop in recommendation coverage, and how large was it?
Did Hinge's move to 82.0% represent a meaningful shift or normal variation?

Brand	Aug 2026	Oct 2026	Movement since baseline
Hinge	78.5%	82.0%	Up 3.5 points
Bumble	76.4%	78.6%	Up 2.2 points
OkCupid	61.7%	70.5%	Up 8.8 points
Tinder	66.1%	69.5%	Up 3.4 points
Match	48.3%	52.0%	Up 3.7 points
eharmony	52.2%	51.6%	Down 0.6 points
Grindr	34.6%	35.3%	Up 0.7 points
HER	34.1%	32.5%	Down 1.6 points
Plenty of Fish	23.7%	28.8%	Up 5.1 points
Coffee Meets Bagel	26.0%	21.4%	Down 4.6 points

Largest Increase: OkCupid

OkCupid's valid recommendation coverage rose to 70.5% in October 2026 from 61.7% in August 2026, a movement beyond normal variation. This was OkCupid's second consecutive monthly increase, following a rise to 64.0% in September 2026 from 61.7% in August 2026. The brand's raw presence rate also rose to 81.8% in October 2026 from 77.2% in August 2026. Top-three placement rose to 18.9% in October 2026 from 15.8% in August 2026, while rank-one placement held steady at 3.6% in October 2026 compared with 3.5% in August 2026.

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: Plenty of Fish

Plenty of Fish's valid recommendation coverage rose to 28.8% in October 2026 from 23.7% in August 2026, a movement beyond normal variation, and its second consecutive monthly increase. Raw presence rose to 40.2% in October 2026 from 33.1% in August 2026. Rank-one placement rose to 5.7% in October 2026 from 3.5% in August 2026.

Largest Decline: Coffee Meets Bagel

Coffee Meets Bagel's valid recommendation coverage fell to 21.4% in October 2026 from 26.0% in August 2026, a movement beyond normal variation. This was the brand's second consecutive monthly decline, following a fall to 22.8% in September 2026 from 26.0% in August 2026. Raw presence fell to 25.6% in October 2026 from 33.0% in August 2026.

Category Leader: Hinge

Hinge led all tracked brands with 82.0% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026, up from 78.5% in August 2026, a move within normal variation. Its top-three rate was 54.3% in October 2026, compared with 54.6% in August 2026, and its rank-one rate was 31.3%, compared with 35.8% in August 2026. Hinge held the highest presence rate in the category at 97.6% in October 2026.

Recommendation Placement Snapshot

Questions This Section Answers

Why can two dating brands with similar coverage have very different rank-one rates?
How far ahead is Hinge's rank-one rate compared with Bumble's despite similar presence?

Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. The four leading brands illustrate this well.

Brand	Oct 2026 top-three rate	Oct 2026 rank-one rate	Aug 2026 top-three rate	Aug 2026 rank-one rate
Hinge	54.3%	31.3%	54.6%	35.8%
Bumble	35.9%	1.1%	35.8%	2.2%
OkCupid	18.9%	3.6%	15.8%	3.5%
Tinder	37.5%	12.4%	32.8%	10.3%

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

Close coverage levels can still hide very different first-position rates. Hinge's rank-one rate of 31.3% in October 2026 was far higher than Bumble's 1.1%, despite Bumble's presence rate of 97.9% exceeding Hinge's 97.6%.

Buyer-Intent Distribution

All qualified observations in all three months fell into the Brand Recommendation class.

Buyer-intent class	Aug 2026	Oct 2026
Brand Recommendation	716	702
Pricing & Value	0	0
Multi-Brand Comparison	0	0
Total qualified observations	716	702

The current public series measures brand recommendation discovery and does not yet contain qualified observations in the pricing and value or multi-brand comparison classes.

Historical Measurement Record

Questions This Section Answers

Does the three-month record support a trend in Online Dating recommendation leadership?
How has Hinge's coverage moved across the August, September, and October 2026 measurements?

New measurements are added to the same report.

Measurement	Qualified observations	Coverage leader	Leader coverage	Largest coverage movement
Aug 2026	716	Hinge	78.5%	Baseline month
Sep 2026	719	Hinge	74.6%	HER down 6.3 points
Oct 2026	702	Hinge	82.0%	OkCupid up 8.8 points

Evidence and Source Layer

Questions This Section Answers

What does the prompt-level source data actually capture about AI recommendations?
Does a cited source prove it caused a dating brand's 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, 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 do AI platforms cite most when recommending dating brands?
Are dating brands' own domains among the most-cited sources in this vertical?

Across all AI platform responses in October 2026, 6,083 citations were observed across 886 unique domains.

Rank	Domain	Citations	Share	Platforms citing
1	mashable.com	536	8.8%	Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
2	reddit.com	420	6.9%	ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
3	datingadvice.com	319	5.2%	ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
4	forbes.com	310	5.1%	ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
5	mindbodygreen.com	202	3.3%	ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
6	datingnews.com	197	3.2%	ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
7	youtube.com	193	3.2%	AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
8	google.com	189	3.1%	AI Mode, AI Overviews
9	glamour.com	182	3.0%	ChatGPT, AI Mode, AI Overviews, Perplexity
10	datescout.us	154	2.5%	ChatGPT, Copilot, Perplexity

Citations are broadly distributed: the top 10 domains together account for roughly 44% of all citations, and no single domain exceeds 9%. No tracked brand's own domain appears in the top 10. General-interest and technology publishers (mashable.com, forbes.com, glamour.com), community and review platforms (reddit.com, youtube.com), and dating-specific sources (datingadvice.com, datingnews.com, datescout.us) dominate the sources AI surfaces referenced in this vertical.

About This Benchmark

The LLM Authority Index AI Visibility Market Discovery Index tracks how AI search and assistant surfaces recommend brands within a category. It is built from repeated, structured prompts across six canonical AI surface families, with each response audited for brand presence, recommendation placement, and sentiment.

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