Last updated: October 2026
To get onto the best-of lists AI engines cite, find the third-party listicles that already appear in answers for your category, give their authors real reasons and evidence to include you, and never pay for placement without clear disclosure. Self-ranked lists on your own site carry more risk and less weight.
Key takeaways๐
- Listicles are one of the most cited page types in AI answers. Wix Studio's research found they took 40.9% of citations for commercial queries.
-
Third-party lists beat self-promotional ones. In the same study, 80.9% of listicle citations in professional services went to third-party lists.
-
The lists worth chasing are the ones AI engines already cite for your buyer prompts. Find them by checking answers, not by guessing.
-
Pitch list authors with facts they can verify: pricing, a trial or demo account, customer evidence and a clear "best for" angle.
-
Paid placements need clear disclosure under FTC guidance, and the FTC's 2024 reviews rule bans passing off a site you control as an independent reviewer.
Why do AI answers lean on best-of lists?๐
AI answers lean on best-of lists because a list covers many brands, compares them on the points buyers ask about, and is written around the same "best X for Y" phrasing people type into ChatGPT or Perplexity. One page gives the model a ready-made shortlist it can summarize.
Two studies put numbers on this:
| Study | What it measured | Key finding |
|---|---|---|
| Wix Studio AI Search Lab, via Search Engine Land (March 2026) | 75,000 AI answers and more than 1 million citations across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode and Perplexity | Listicles were the top format at 21.9% of all citations and 40.9% of citations for commercial queries. Third-party listicles took 80.9% of listicle citations in professional services, versus 19.1% for self-promotional lists. |
| Evertune, sponsored article on Search Engine Land (May 2026) | The 6,000 most-cited URLs per model across ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Google AI Mode, AI Overviews and Perplexity, March and April | About half of the roughly 25,000 unique URLs were listicles. Listicles were 40% to 65% of most-cited URLs depending on the model, and ranked lists made up 71% to 86% of them. |
Read both with some care. Evertune sells an AI marketing platform and its piece is marked as sponsored content. Peec AI's research notes also say that an August 2026 ChatGPT model update shifted retrieval share from listicles toward brand product pages, so the balance can move. Even so, every source points the same way for commercial prompts: when a buyer asks "what is the best tool for X," lists written by someone other than the vendor carry a lot of weight.
That matches the domain data. In Profound's analysis of 680 million citations from August 2024 to June 2025, Forbes (1.1%) and TechRadar (0.9%) were among ChatGPT's ten most cited sources, and both publish a lot of ranked lists. Our breakdown of the most cited domains in ChatGPT covers the wider picture.
Should you just publish your own best-of list?๐
Publishing your own "best tools" list with your brand at No. 1 is the fastest option, and it is also the one with the most downside in 2026.
In February, Search Engine Land reported research by Lily Ray of Amsive on SaaS brands that lost 30% to 50% of their organic visibility within weeks. The losses were concentrated in blog subfolders full of self-promotional "best" lists, often refreshed with the new year in the title. Google has not confirmed a specific update, and other factors were likely involved. But AI Overviews and AI Mode draw on Google's index, and Ray noted that ChatGPT may be affected too, so pages that lose trust in Google can lose AI visibility with it.
The Wix data points the same way: models cited third-party lists far more often than self-promotional ones.
If you do publish a comparison or list on your own site, make it honest. Say you built one of the products, explain your criteria, and give competitors a fair hearing. That is how we handle our own lists on this blog, such as the best AI search visibility tools roundup.
How do you find the best-of lists that AI engines cite?๐
The lists that matter are the ones AI engines already cite when buyers ask about your category. A list with no AI citations and no search traffic is not worth much effort, however big the publisher.
Here is a simple process:
-
Write 10 to 25 buyer prompts. Use the way customers actually ask: "best payroll software for restaurants," "Gusto alternatives for a 20-person company," "what CRM should a small law firm use."
-
Run them in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Overviews. Note every cited URL. Perplexity and AI Overviews show sources clearly. In ChatGPT, open the sources panel when the answer uses search.
-
Sort the cited URLs by type. Separate listicles from vendor pages, review sites, Reddit threads and news. Our guide to what sources ChatGPT cites explains the usual mix.
-
Count repeats. A list cited for five of your prompts across two engines is a priority target. A list cited once is a maybe.
-
Check whether you are on each list, and who is. If a competitor appears on a list that keeps getting cited and you do not, that is your clearest gap.
-
Repeat monthly. AI answers change from one ask to the next, so one run is a snapshot, not a ranking.
You can do this by hand in a spreadsheet. A tracker does the repeat runs for you. TrendlyAI, for example, runs your prompts weekly on ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Overviews and flags prompts where a competitor is named and you are not. Our competitor AI visibility analysis guide walks through the manual version.
What do best-of list authors need from you?๐
List authors need facts they can check quickly, a reason your product belongs on the list, and a way to try it. Most of them are busy editors or freelance writers updating a page on a deadline, not people waiting for your pitch.
Google's own guidance on writing high-quality reviews tells publishers to show first-hand evidence, share measurements, cover comparable options and explain why something is "best" for a given use. Good list authors follow it. Make that easy for them:
| What the author needs | What you can provide |
|---|---|
| First-hand experience | A free trial, a demo account with sample data, or a product sample shipped at no charge |
| Accurate facts | A one-page fact sheet: pricing in USD, plan limits, integrations, founding year, support hours |
| A clear "best for" angle | One honest sentence on who you are best for, such as "best for clinics under 10 staff" |
| Evidence | Public reviews, case studies with named customers who agreed to be named, screenshots |
| Fair comparison | A straight answer on where a competitor is a better fit |
| Up-to-date details | A contact who answers fact-check questions within a day |
How do you pitch a list author without being spammy?๐
Pitch a list author the way you would want to be pitched: short, specific to their article, and easy to say no to.
A good pitch email:
- Names the exact article and the section where you might fit.
-
Says in one sentence who your product is for and how it differs from the tools already listed.
-
Offers access, not a demand. "Happy to set up a trial account if you are updating the list" is better than "please add us."
-
Includes your fact sheet link and current pricing.
-
Does not offer money, gifts or links in exchange for inclusion unless you are prepared to have that relationship disclosed (more on that below).
Some practical tips:
- Target the update cycle. Lists with a year in the title get refreshed. Pitching a few weeks before the usual refresh date works better than pitching the week after.
-
Look for gaps the author can use. If the list has no option for a use case you serve well, say so plainly.
-
Fix your own facts first. If your pricing page is vague, an author cannot cite it. Clear pricing and plan pages also help AI engines directly, as our guide on how to get mentioned in ChatGPT explains.
How do you avoid paid placement and disclosure problems?๐
Paid placement on a best-of list is legal in the US, but the payment or other material connection has to be disclosed clearly, and you cannot dress up a site you control as an independent reviewer.
The relevant FTC rules:
- Endorsement Guides. The FTC's Endorsement Guides Q&A says that when there is a connection between an endorser and a marketer that a significant minority of consumers would not expect, and it would affect how they weigh the endorsement, it should be disclosed clearly and conspicuously. That covers commissions, payment and free products. The FTC also notes that a bare "affiliate link" label may not be clear enough, while something like "paid link" or "I get commissions for purchases made through links in this post" is.
- The 2024 Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule. The FTC announced the final rule on August 14, 2024, and it took effect on October 21, 2024, according to the FTC's Q&A on the rule. Among other things, it bars a business from misrepresenting that a website or entity it controls provides independent reviews or opinions about a category that includes its own products. The FTC can seek civil penalties against knowing violators.
What this means in practice:
| Situation | What to do |
|---|---|
| You pay a publisher for a sponsored listing | Make sure the publisher labels it clearly as sponsored or paid, near the listing, not only in a footer |
| You run an affiliate program and list authors earn commission | Expect and accept a clear disclosure on their page. Do not ask them to hide it |
| You send a free product or a free paid plan to a reviewer | That is a material connection. The reviewer should disclose it |
| You own or fund a "review site" that ranks your category | Disclose ownership prominently, or do not run it. Do not present it as independent |
| You publish a "best of" list on your own blog | Say clearly that you make one of the products. Keep the comparison fair |
None of this is legal advice. If you are spending real money on placements, talk to a lawyer who knows FTC advertising rules.
How do you know if it is working?๐
Track whether AI engines name you for the prompts tied to the lists you targeted, not just whether you got onto the list. Getting added to a page is the input. Being named in answers is the outcome.
I set up TrendlyAI to work this way because it is the only measure that maps to revenue: run the same buyer prompts on a schedule, record who gets named and which URLs get cited, and look for the week a list you earned starts showing up as a source. When it finds a gap, TrendlyAI drafts fixes such as a comparison page, a best-of list or a Reddit answer, but outreach to other people's lists still takes a human.
If you want a quick baseline first, the free AI visibility check runs 5 prompts on ChatGPT and Perplexity in about 30 seconds with no signup. For the wider strategy, start at the GEO hub.
Frequently asked questions๐
Why do ChatGPT and Perplexity cite best-of lists so often?๐
Best-of lists match the "best X for Y" way buyers ask, and they compare many brands on one page. Wix Studio's research across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode and Perplexity found listicles took 40.9% of citations for commercial queries, nearly double any other content type.
Can I pay to be added to a best-of list?๐
You can pay for placement in the US, but the payment must be disclosed clearly to readers under the FTC's Endorsement Guides. Undisclosed paid placements risk FTC trouble and lose trust with readers. AI engines also appear to favor neutral, editorial lists over obviously promotional ones.
Is it worth publishing my own "best tools" list?๐
It can be, if it is honest. Disclose that you make one of the products, explain your criteria and treat competitors fairly. Self-ranked lists that put your brand first with no evidence have been linked to visibility drops in Google, which can also reduce AI citations.
How long does it take for a new list placement to show up in AI answers?๐
There is no fixed timeline. Engines that search the web live, such as Perplexity and ChatGPT with search, can pick up a refreshed page fairly quickly. Answers also vary from one ask to the next, so measure across several weeks rather than judging from one check.