Ask five AI engines for the best tool in a category and you tend to get five different answers. This page is a running record of what they actually recommend: which tools each engine names, and how far apart the engines are from each other. Every figure is a dated capture with the raw data attached. I do not tell anyone how to win AI search, and I do not decide the rankings. The engines produce the numbers. I record them and show the work.
Maintained by Vincent Wesley Couey, independent AI-citation analyst. Every figure below is traceable to an open dataset; the underlying data is CC BY 4.0 and DOI-backed where a permanent identifier exists.
Two separate studies, two separate engine panels, two dated snapshots. See each category and the provenance section below for the exact panel behind each number.
Question put to each engine: “What is the best AI video generation tool?”
For AI video tools, exactly one name survived all five engines: Creatify. Every other tool that cleared the bar was missed by at least one engine.
In the recorded 2026-06-17 sample, 1 of 22 tools (Creatify) was named by all 5 engines. Mean pairwise overlap of each engine’s top-5 was 0.223, a Divergence Score of 78 of 100.
| Tool | Named by | Total mentions |
|---|---|---|
| Creatify | 5 of 5 | 6 |
| InVideo | 4 of 5 | 14 |
| HeyGen | 4 of 5 | 13 |
| Synthesia | 4 of 5 | 13 |
| Google Veo | 4 of 5 | 10 |
| CapCut | 4 of 5 | 6 |
| Higgsfield | 4 of 5 | 6 |
| Canva | 3 of 5 | 9 |
| Runway | 3 of 5 | 7 |
| Adobe Firefly | 3 of 5 | 6 |
| Kling | 3 of 5 | 5 |
| Fliki | 3 of 5 | 3 |
| Seedance | 3 of 5 | 3 |
Tools named by at least 3 of the 5 engines in the recorded sample (13 of 22 tools cleared that bar). "Named by N of 5" counts how many distinct engines named the tool at least once; it is not an endorsement.
Method caveat · Per-engine naming counts are small and several tools tie at the top-5 boundary. Ties were broken by total cross-engine mentions, then tool name. Directional single-capture figure.
Question put to each engine: “What is the best tool for [16 B2B / go-to-market software categories]?”
Across sixteen B2B software categories, the five engines never once agreed on a single best tool. Zero categories out of sixteen.
In the recorded 2026-06-19 sample, 0 of 16 categories had all 5 engines name the same single top tool (0 percent full cross-engine agreement). Mean pairwise overlap of each engine’s top-5 was 0.387, a Divergence Score of 61 of 100.
| Tool | Named by | Total mentions |
|---|---|---|
| HubSpot | 5 of 5 | 37 |
| Mailchimp | 5 of 5 | 15 |
| Ahrefs | 5 of 5 | 14 |
| SEMrush | 5 of 5 | 13 |
| Salesforce | 5 of 5 | 12 |
| ActiveCampaign | 5 of 5 | 11 |
| Klaviyo | 5 of 5 | 11 |
| Zendesk | 5 of 5 | 10 |
| Calendly | 5 of 5 | 9 |
| Jasper | 5 of 5 | 9 |
Tools named by all 5 engines somewhere across the 16-category audit (23 tools cleared that bar; the 10 most-mentioned are shown). Note the distinction the honesty floor forces: being named by all 5 engines somewhere is NOT the same as all 5 engines agreeing on the same top pick for one category, which happened in 0 of 16 categories.
Method caveat · Most tools appear as an engine top pick in only one category, so the per-engine top-5 sets rest heavily on tie-breaking and read as directional only. The robust, primary figure for this dataset is the recorded 0 percent full cross-engine agreement on the single top pick (0 of 16 categories). An earlier 3-engine GTM run (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews) agreed fully on 36 percent of queries.
For a category, we take each engine’s top-5 recommended tools from its recorded answers, then measure how much those shortlists overlap. The score is:
Divergence Score = 100 × (1 − mean pairwise Jaccard overlap
of each engine's top-5 shortlist)
0 = every engine returns an identical shortlist
100 = no two engines overlap on a single toolThe mean is taken over all engine pairs (10 pairs for a 5-engine panel). The score is directional, not a p-value: the shortlists come from a single dated capture, and where naming counts are small the top-5 boundary depends on tie-breaking. Each category above states its own caveat. The complementary positive figure, “named by N of the panel,” is the Consensus Leaderboard the same instrument produces.
The same question, asked again, can return a different shortlist from the same engine. Volatility will measure how much a single engine disagrees with itself from run to run (the mean set-difference of its own top-5 across repeated captures). That is a separate thing from Divergence, which is the engines disagreeing with each other.
The datasets on this page are single captures, so Volatility has no honest value yet. It is deliberately shown here with no number. Volatility will be computed from repeated captures beginning the next measurement cycle, and reported per engine, per category, with the run count on its face. Until then, treat every ranking here as one dated reading, not a fixed property of any engine.
Every figure is the recorded output of live AI engines on a dated snapshot, not a claim that any tool is objectively best and not a judgment of any company. Each panel is named per dataset; the two studies use different panels and are never merged into one blended “five engines.” “Named by N of the panel” is a checkable frame, not an endorsement. AI answers are volatile; re-run the published protocol to reproduce. Data is CC BY 4.0.
Every measurement behind the Index is published open, CC BY 4.0, with a permanent DOI where one exists. Browse the catalog and download the raw JSON.
See whether the engines name you when a buyer asks for the best tool in your category, with a dated snapshot. Free, measurement-backed.
Reported, not ranked. Snapshots are dated and prior snapshots are not overwritten silently.