Online Stock Brokers: AI Visibility Market Discovery Index

Benchmark Summary

Questions This Section Answers

• Which online stock broker leads AI recommendation coverage in October 2026, and by how much?
• Which brands moved beyond normal monthly variation since the July 2026 baseline?

Fidelity is the October 2026 coverage leader in the Online Stock Brokers benchmark, with valid recommendation coverage of 84.5%, ahead of Charles Schwab at 83.3%, a gap of just 1.2 points between the top two brands. The category recorded no month-over-month movement beyond normal variation. The largest coverage increase from September 2026 to October 2026 was Fidelity, up from 81.1% to 84.5%, a gain of 3.4 points. The largest coverage decline was Webull, down from 66.9% in September 2026 to 63.1% in October 2026, a decrease of 3.8 points. Both moves fall within normal month-to-month variation.

Across the full series that began in July 2026, two brands declined beyond normal monthly variation: Merrill Edge, from 13.2% in July 2026 to 8.0% in October 2026, and Tastytrade, from 29.5% in July 2026 to 22.9% in October 2026. Tastytrade declined in each of the three months measured since July 2026. The remaining eight tracked brands are classified as stable relative to the July 2026 baseline.

The benchmark began with 800 prompt-surface observations in each month and produced 672 qualified observations in October 2026 after qualification.

Current Benchmark at a Glance

Qualified surface breadth counts the canonical AI and search surface families that produced at least one qualified observation in the month. The six families are ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and AI Mode. The Online Stock Brokers benchmark registered all six in both months. September 2026 qualified observations were 652.

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

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. For more detail, see AI Visibility Market Discovery Methodology.

Current Brand Standings

Questions This Section Answers

• How do the ten tracked online stock brokers rank by valid recommendation coverage?
• Where do Fidelity and Charles Schwab differ on top-three placement and rank-one recommendations?
• How large is the gap between the leading brokers and the rest of the field?

This table is the primary current-month benchmark view, sorted by valid recommendation coverage.

How to Read the Standings

• Presence rate: share of qualified observations where the brand was mentioned, whether or not it was recommended.
• Valid recommendation coverage: share of qualified observations where the brand received one or more valid, non-placeholder recommendations.
• Top-three rate: share of qualified observations where the brand appeared among the top three recommended options.
• Rank-one rate: share of qualified observations where the brand was the first recommendation given.
• Net sentiment: positive minus negative mention tone, 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 online stock brokers lost the most AI recommendation coverage since July 2026?
• Did any brand improve its recommendation coverage over the measured period?

Largest Decline: Tastytrade

Tastytrade's valid recommendation coverage fell from 29.5% in July 2026 to 22.9% in October 2026, a 6.6-point decline beyond normal monthly variation. The brand declined in each of the three months measured since July 2026, moving from 29.5% in July 2026 to 26.4% in August 2026 to 25.6% in September 2026 to 22.9% in October 2026. Its presence rate fell from 31.8% in July 2026 to 24.1% in October 2026, a 7.7-point decline, while its rank-one rate rose from 4.3% in July 2026 to 5.8% in October 2026. Tastytrade represented 154 of the 672 qualified observations in October 2026.

Largest Decline: Merrill Edge

Merrill Edge's valid recommendation coverage fell from 13.2% in July 2026 to 8.0% in October 2026, a 5.2-point decline beyond normal monthly variation. The brand declined to 10.7% in August 2026 and 7.5% in September 2026, then moved up slightly to 8.0% in October 2026, a 0.5-point increase from September 2026 within normal variation. Its presence rate fell from 17.3% in July 2026 to 11.6% in October 2026, a 5.7-point decline. Merrill Edge represented 54 of the 672 qualified observations in October 2026.

Category Leader: Fidelity

Fidelity leads at 84.5% valid recommendation coverage in October 2026, ahead of Charles Schwab at 83.3%, a 1.2-point gap between the top two brands. Fidelity took the leader position from Charles Schwab, which led the benchmark from July 2026 through September 2026. Charles Schwab and Fidelity together hold a wide margin over Robinhood and Interactive Brokers, who follow at 78.3% and 77.4% in October 2026.

Recommendation Placement Snapshot

Questions This Section Answers

• How can Fidelity and Charles Schwab have nearly identical recommendation coverage but such different rank-one rates?
• What does the placement gap between the top two brokers mean for first-position visibility in AI answers?

Coverage alone does not show how prominently a brand is recommended. The table below shows top-three and rank-one placement for the two leading brands in October 2026.

Fidelity and Charles Schwab hold close valid recommendation coverage of 84.5% and 83.3% in October 2026, but their placement differs sharply. Fidelity's rank-one rate was 48.2% against Charles Schwab's 18.9%. Close coverage can still hide materially different first-position rates.

Buyer-Intent Distribution

All qualified observations in both July 2026 and October 2026 fell into the Brand Recommendation class of buyer-intent discovery.

The current public series measures Brand Recommendation discovery only and does not yet contain qualified observations in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison classes.

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 source-level data does the benchmark record alongside AI stock broker recommendations?
• Does appearing as a cited source prove that an article or site caused a broker 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, not automatic proof that the source caused the recommendation. The benchmark records which sources appeared alongside answers, not whether those sources drove the model's output.

Scope Boundaries

This public benchmark does not measure:

• Market share, sales, or revenue outcomes for any brand
• Attributable conversions or purchases from AI recommendations
• Every possible AI or search response across all platforms and models
• Organic-search ranking positions on traditional search engines
• Social media mention volume or sentiment outside the tested surfaces
• Private, sponsored, or gated AI channels
• Causality from a metric movement alone; the benchmark records the change, not the reason

Top 10 Cited Domains

Questions This Section Answers

• Which domains were cited most often across AI answers about online stock brokers?
• How concentrated are citations across the top domains, and which broker-owned sites appear in the top ten?

Across all AI platform responses in October 2026, the benchmark recorded 6,045 total citations across 731 unique domains.

Citations are moderately concentrated: the top ten domains account for roughly half of all citations, while the remaining 721 unique domains divide the rest. Two tracked brands' own domains appear in the top ten, fidelity.com at rank seven and schwab.com at rank ten. Third-party review and comparison sites lead the list, with nerdwallet.com and investopedia.com together representing nearly one in five citations, followed by a mix of media outlets, video, search infrastructure, and community forums.

About This Benchmark

The LLM Authority Index AI Visibility Market Discovery Index tracks how often and how prominently brands appear in AI-generated answers across the major AI and search surface families. It is a neutral, industry-level measurement of presence, recommendation coverage, placement, and sentiment, published monthly.

Research links:

• 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 into your brand's specific AI visibility landscape.

Get my free AI Company Index