Preferences
Privacy is important to us, so you have the option of disabling certain types of storage that may not be necessary for the basic functioning of the website. Blocking categories may impact your experience on the website. More information
Privacy is important to us, so you have the option of disabling certain types of storage that may not be necessary for the basic functioning of the website. Blocking categories may impact your experience on the website. More information
Data study of 301025 AI answers: how often HubSpot is cited by ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude and Grok, month by month over 13 months.
HubSpot is cited in 0.47% of measured answers over the last three months, which places it twelfth of the platforms tracked. It is cited by all five models, most often by Gemini at 0.78% and least often by Perplexity at 0.08%.
HubSpot is the clearest case of a content marketing engine losing citation share as the models diversified their sources.
A citation rate of 2% means the source was cited twice for every 100 measured answers. Rates are computed per model against the number of answers of that model, so a model with a smaller sample never distorts a column. A source cited several times inside one answer is counted once per company block, which keeps a single verbose answer from dominating a month.
The gap between the model that cites HubSpot most and the one that cites it least is 0.7 points. That spread, not the average, is what should decide a budget: the same work returns most on Gemini and least on Perplexity. Across all tracked platforms, HubSpot ranks twelfth.
Over the 13 months measured, HubSpot moved from 0.96% in August 2025 to 0.37% in August 2026, with a peak of 2.45% in February 2026. Averaged over the first three months against the last three, the movement is minus 0.94 points.
A large blog library used to be a dependable way to be quoted on marketing questions. Over the measured period, that position eroded on every model in the panel, while review, video and community sources rose. The finding matters beyond one company: it suggests that generic top of funnel articles, however well produced, are being replaced by sources with first hand signal. For a marketing team, the implication is uncomfortable but simple, which is that another well written overview article is now the least likely format to be cited.
Every number on this page comes from the public Sorank dataset. The underlying figures, the monthly detail and the filters are available here:
Open the source data on data.sorank.com
Data updated on 2026-08-26.
This study is free to quote, in an article, a deck or a report. Please cite the source and the measurement period, because the numbers move every month.
Sorank (2026). HubSpot AI Citation Study: Does HubSpot Get You Cited by the AIs. Sorank GEO studies, measured on 301025 AI answers collected between August 2025 and August 2026. Available at https://www.sorank.com/data/hubspot-ai-citation-study
The same panel, read from another angle:
This study describes a market. Sorank measures your site: which questions mention you, which mention someone else, and what to publish to change that, tracked weekly across the same five AI.
Start with 3 days free. A payment card is required to open the trial.
HubSpot is cited by all five models measured. Gemini cites it most, in 0.78% of its answers, and Perplexity least, in 0.08%. The full model by model breakdown is on this page.
On 301025 answers from five AI, collected between August 2025 and August 2026, with every cited source extracted and normalised. The citation rate is the number of citations per 100 measured answers. The public dataset is on data.sorank.com.
It means undifferentiated blogging is losing share in this panel. Articles that contain something the models cannot find elsewhere, such as measurements, tests or proprietary numbers, are the ones still being cited.
.webp){kind=small}
.webp){kind=small}
.svg)
.svg)
