Close the three sources AIs use against you.
Citation Gaps compares your source profile to competitors, across every tracked model, and returns a short ranked list of the levers most likely to move the needle.
Three phases, one readable output.
01 — Analysis
We read every citation from your tracked models over the past weeks, group them by source and topic, and compare your profile to competitors.
02 — Gap detection
We flag sources that frequently back competitors but not you. Plus: recurring gaps across multiple models, which count as a robust signal.
03 — Recommendation
Output is a short prioritized list with source name, estimated impact size, and reasoning. You get no spreadsheet wall, just three to five concrete levers.
What ends up on the screen.
The list sorts sources by estimated impact. Each recommendation carries the data point that drove the priority, so your team does not have to guess why this particular source is suggested.
- Source (domain) plus link back to the original citation.
- Severity pill: High priority, Medium priority, or Opportunity, plus brief kind (Content or Submission).
- One-sentence reasoning: who cites it, how often, in what topic context.
- AI advisor reasoning: one or two sentences on why this source carries leverage, with linked top URLs.
Three situations where Citation Gaps is the right next move.
Your Share of Voice has dropped for three weeks with no obvious cause.
Citation Gaps surfaces which sources now back competitors and not you, and prioritizes the first levers.
You are planning a PR or content quarter and need an order.
Instead of juggling ten potential magazine targets, Citation Gaps gives you three, ordered by impact.
You manage multiple brands and need a weekly per-brand recommendation.
Run the analysis per brand, output is a report you can forward directly to the client.
Three prioritized levers a week is the form in which a team actually moves a quarter.
Run your first Citation Gaps analysis.
Analyses are included in the trial, no limit on the first three brands.