Skip to main content
§01 · How it works

See exactly when AI recommends you.

WhyIQ AI Radar measures your AI search visibility. Every week it runs your real buyer-intent prompts through ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Google's AI Mode, then reads back exactly which sources each engine cited. Not a prediction: a measurement of what the engines actually said.

Below is the actual product view, live from the app with sample data. This is what lands in your inbox every week.

The weekly read, live from the productsample data
Are you being recommended?

AI engines regularly recommend Fernway Coffee.

22%Strong

of 9 buyer questions had an AI answer citing you this week (typical range 0 to 49%)

Brand searches: cited on 2 of 23-pass confidence band
What changed this week
  • WonChatGPT · "best specialty coffee subscription"
  • LostPerplexity · "coffee subscription gift ideas"
  • MentionedClaude · "freshest coffee beans delivered"
§02 · The mechanic

Set it up once. Deep scan every week. Read the trend.

Three steps, and only the first one takes any of your time. The rest runs on a weekly cadence and delivers itself.

Step 01 of 03

Set your buyer-intent prompts

You track the questions your buyers actually ask an AI engine, not generic SEO keywords. Run the free check on 8 sample prompts to see a snapshot first. SMB tracks 30 prompts weekly; Agency tracks 40 per client domain, split across brand-defense and category questions.

The prompt bank is the measurement frame. Change it and you change what is measured, so it stays stable week to week and each new prompt is added alongside the old ones. That is what keeps the trend line comparable.

Step 02 of 03

We run a real scan every week

We send each of your prompts to ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Google's AI Mode, then read back the full ordered list of sources each answer cited. This is the same retrieve-and-cite step the engine runs to build an answer. No scrape, no proxy, no guess.

We record whether you were cited, where you sat in the source list, which competitor held the slot when you did not, and how the answer framed you when you did. On Agency, every prompt runs 3 times per engine and the passes are averaged, so the number is a confidence band, not single-shot noise.

Step 03 of 03

Email lands. Trend builds.

The moment the scan finishes we email you a digest naming the engine and competitor that moved most this week. Your dashboard reads like Search Console for AI answers and stacks week over week, so the headline is the drift, not a one-shot verdict.

On the Agency tier the same weekly cycle produces a white-label client report on one durable link: verdict, movement, verbatim AI quotes, competing sources, and the plan. Numbers freeze per week, so a client can compare last week to this week honestly.

§03 · The power view reads like Search Console

Plain language up front. Search Console depth one click away.

Every week opens with a plain answer: is AI recommending this brand, what changed, and what to do next. When you want the raw numbers, the Explore view is modeled on the report you already read every week: a Performance tab with metric cards, a weekly chart, and dimension slices, plus a Coverage tab that explains exactly why each prompt is or is not cited, the way page indexing explains your URLs.

The differences are the point. Search Console passively logs your real Google traffic. AI Radar actively runs your buyer prompts against five AI engines every week, then reads back exactly what each engine cited. We measure citation the way the engines produce it: ask the engine the real question, record the real answer. Same reading skills, same method the engine uses, new surface.

ClicksCitationsReal AI answers that cited your domain. We read what the engine actually cited, not a prediction.
ImpressionsAI answers checkedEvery prompt x engine answer we measure each week.
CTRCitation rateCitations divided by answers checked.
PositionAvg cite positionWhere you sit in the answer's source list. #1 gets the trust.
Plus the parts GSC cannot give you: who wins the answer slot when you do not, and how the answer frames you when you do.
§04 · The five engines

Every engine cites differently. We measure all five.

A tool that only checks ChatGPT tells you a fifth of the story. Radar runs every prompt through all five mainstream engines, because the same brand can win in one and be invisible in another. Here is roughly what earns a citation in each.

ChatGPTComparative content and third-party coverage. Listicles, alternative pages, and category round-ups that name you next to the competition are what get pulled into an answer.
PerplexityCommunity and forum presence. In the 2026 5W citation index, 46.7% of Perplexity's citations came from Reddit threads, so an active community footprint moves the number here more than anywhere else.
ClaudeAuthoritative, well-structured content it can cite with confidence. Clear comparative and explanatory pages that answer the question directly earn the slot.
GeminiCrawlable HTML and a first-paragraph answer. Google's engines reward a page that states the answer up top in text a crawler can read, not one buried behind JavaScript.
Google AI ModeThe same on-page fundamentals as Gemini, measured through Google's real AI Mode surface (English queries today). Crawlable, direct, and structured wins the citation.

One signal cuts across all five: brand mentions. Ahrefs' 2026 study of 75,000 brands found the correlation between brand mentions and AI citation at r=0.664, the single strongest predictor, well ahead of backlinks. Radar tracks that footprint too, so the report points you at the work that actually moves the number.

§05 · The measurement

We measure citation the way the engines produce it. Ask the real question. Record the real answer.

Real query, real answer

We send your actual prompt to each engine and read back the full ordered list of sources it cited. Same retrieve-and-cite step the engine runs to build the answer. No scrape, no proxy, no model of what it might say.

3-pass confidence band

AI engines are probabilistic. Agency runs each prompt 3 times per engine and averages, so the report shows a band (cited 2 of 3 passes) instead of a single-shot yes-or-no that flips next week.

Position and framing, not just yes-or-no

We record where you sit in the source list, which competitor holds the slot when you are absent, and how the answer frames you when you are present. A citation buried at position 8 is not a citation at position 1.

Honest when we cannot measure

If an engine returns nothing usable for a prompt, that shows as no data, never a fabricated zero. A steady week says steady rather than inventing movement. That is what makes the number defensible in front of a client.

A note on the bright line: this is measurement, not the scanner's prediction. The WhyIQ Scanner's AI Citability Index scores a page for the on-page signals that make citation likely. AI Radar records the citations that actually happened. One predicts; the other measures.

The weekly client report

Every week ends in something you can put in front of a client.

One durable white-label link per client. A plain-language verdict, what moved, what the AI actually said verbatim, who holds the answer slots you are missing, and the plan. Your branding, your name on it, numbers frozen per week. This is the real report component with sample data, not a mock.

See the full sample client reportFictional client, real product. Agency tier publishes it white-label.
§06 · FAQ

How it works, straight answers.

How is this different from the scanner's AI Citability score?

They sit on opposite sides of the same line. The WhyIQ Scanner's AI Citability Index predicts readiness: it audits a page for the on-page signals (FAQ content, statistical density, named author, crawler access) that make a citation likely. AI Radar measures the outcome: it runs your real prompts through the real engines and records the citations that actually happened. The scanner tells you if a page is ready to be cited. AI Radar tells you if it actually is, by which engine, and for which prompt.

Do you really run the prompts, or is this a prediction?

We run them. Every weekly scan sends each of your buyer prompts to ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Google's AI Mode, and we read back the exact sources each answer cited. It is a measurement of what the engines actually said, not a model of what they might say. Zero rows when we genuinely cannot measure, never a hallucinated zero.

Why weekly and not daily or real-time?

Two reasons. Off-page work (content, entity cleanup, review-site footprint) takes 4 to 8 weeks to land in AI answers, so the useful signal is the trend, not the minute-to-minute snapshot. And AirOps' 548,000-page study found AI citations have a roughly 3-month half-life, which makes weekly the minimum cadence that actually catches drift without drowning it in noise. A daily single-read tool reports noise as a verdict.

Why does the Agency tier run every check 3 times?

AI engines are probabilistic. Ask the same question twice and you can get two different answers, so a single read is a coin flip dressed up as a fact. The Agency tier queries every prompt on every engine 3 times each week and averages the passes into a confidence band, so the report reads 'cited 2 of 3 passes' instead of a yes-or-no that flips next week. If a number is going in front of a client, it should be one you can defend.

Which engines are included, and can I add more?

Five on every tier: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Google AI. There are no per-engine add-ons; the price is flat and every engine is in every plan. The Agency tier upgrade is rigor (the 3-pass confidence band) and client domains, not more engines. Grok and Microsoft Copilot are on the roadmap for the Agency tier once their measurement pricing stabilises.

See your snapshot in about ten minutes. Then watch the trend build.

Run a free check on 8 sample prompts across all 5 engines, no account needed. Or look at a full sample client report first: fictional client, real product.