Generative engine optimization statistics (2026)
These are the generative engine optimization statistics from Vasukai's own studies, run on 13 October 2026. They show which assistants cite Wikipedia, which AI visibility tools get recommended, and which websites AI answers rely on. Every number links to its study page so you can check the source.
How these figures were collected
Vasukai asked a set of questions once of each assistant on 13 October 2026 and recorded every source the answers cited. The questions were asked in English, and the studies cover the UK market. This is a snapshot, not a live feed.
AI answers change from one ask to the next. Ask the same question twice and you may get different sources. So read these figures as a picture of what happened on that day, not as a permanent ranking.
The first study looked at 223 answers from 9 assistants to 25 questions. The second looked at 667 answers from 9 assistants to 73 questions in English, Spanish and German. Both were run on the same date.
For example, a shop owner in Manchester might ask an assistant for the best local supplier today and see one set of names, then ask again tomorrow and see another. That is normal. The studies capture one moment.
Which assistants cite Wikipedia
This section uses figures from the AI citation study at the study page. Wikipedia was cited in 38 of 223 answers overall, which is 17 percent.
The assistants varied a lot. Google AI Overviews cited Wikipedia in 12 of 23 answers (52 percent). Perplexity cited it in 11 of 25 (44 percent). Meta AI and Google AI Mode each cited it in 6 of 25 (24 percent). Gemini cited it in 3 of 25 (12 percent).
ChatGPT, Claude, DeepSeek and Sarvam cited Wikipedia in 0 of the answers recorded in this study.
For example, a dentist in Leeds might ask an assistant about a treatment and see Wikipedia quoted in the answer. The same question asked of a different assistant might not mention Wikipedia at all. The assistant you check matters.
Which AI visibility tools AI recommends
This section uses figures from the AI visibility tools study at the study page. The study recorded 667 answers from 9 assistants to 73 questions in English, Spanish and German.
When the assistants recommended AI visibility tools, Peec AI was named in 173 answers. Profound was named in 145. Semrush was named in 142. Otterly.AI was named in 141. Ahrefs was named in 66.
These are mentions in answers, not a ranking of quality. Each tool does different things, and the assistants simply named them at different rates in this study.
For example, a marketing agency owner in Singapore might ask an assistant which tool to use for tracking AI mentions and see one of these names. The next ask might surface a different mix.
The sources behind AI answers
The same study at the study page recorded which websites the answers cited most often. The most cited source was youtube.com, cited 85 times. Next was zapier.com at 81, then businesscloud.co.uk at 74.
These are the sites the assistants leaned on for this set of questions. They are not the only sources, and the list will shift with different questions or languages.
For example, a software company in Berlin might find that a how-to video on YouTube is quoted in an answer about its category, while a written guide on another site is not. The format and the site both play a part.
If your business is mentioned on the sites assistants cite, that mention can feed into the answers. It is one route in, not a guarantee.
What this means for GEO
Each assistant relies on different sources. Wikipedia shows up heavily in Google AI Overviews and Perplexity in this study, but not at all in ChatGPT, Claude, DeepSeek or Sarvam. So checking one assistant tells you only part of the story.
Being mentioned on the sites assistants cite is one route into the answers. If youtube.com, zapier.com or businesscloud.co.uk are cited often for your kind of question, a presence there may help. It is not a guarantee.
For example, a bakery in Toronto might find that a local news site is cited for its area, while a national blog is cited for its recipe. The sites that matter depend on the question and the assistant.
Vasukai can check the assistants your customers use, in their language, and show whether your business is named and which sites are cited instead. It also gives a ranked list of actions and a 'Write it for me' button to draft the text for each fix. There is a free AI check that needs no card.
Questions
Can I use these statistics?
Yes, with credit to Vasukai and a link to the study page. The CSV files are free to reuse.
How often are they updated?
The studies are repeated monthly.
Is Wikipedia involved?
No. Wikipedia is an independent example measured by Vasukai, not affiliated with or endorsed by Wikipedia.
