July 2026 Benchmark
Korean SaaS AI Visibility Benchmark
Initial analysis of brand mention and citation distribution in AI answers across 12 Korean B2B SaaS domains sampled from the public web (measured 2026-07-23)
Key Takeaways
- • Across 12 sampled domains, the median score (p50) is 51/100 and the top quartile starts at 59 — 5 domains reached grade A while 2 were not mentioned at all (D)
- • Platform variance is large — the same sample is mentioned in 83% of cases on Perplexity and Gemini, but only 33% on ChatGPT
- • Sources cited by AI answers rank video, blog platforms, wikis, and IT media at the top — third-party surfaces beyond your own site drive much of the visibility
Sample & Measurement Conditions
12 Korean B2B SaaS domains sampled from the public web, measured under identical conditions. Individual brands and domains are not disclosed (anonymized aggregate).
Inclusion: B2B SaaS operated by Korean companies · public website · spread across 8 sub-verticals · public recognition (news/funding history). Exclusion: consumer-first services, Korean branches of global vendors, and RanketAI itself (conflict of interest). For repeated runs per domain, only the latest valid run enters the distribution.
Major LLMs (ChatGPT · Gemini · Perplexity) · diverse purchase/comparison/discovery prompt combinations · multi-signal axes · See the full methodology
Based on real ChatGPT · Gemini · Perplexity answers · measured 2026-07-23
Score Distribution
Category score percentiles (0-100) and grade distribution. Grades use 4 tiers (A/B/C/D).
| Median (p50) | Top 25% (p75) | Top 10% (p90) |
|---|---|---|
| 51 | 59 | 67 |
Grade distribution
| A | B | C | D |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 domains | 5 domains | 0 domains | 2 domains |
Platform Comparison
The same sample looks very different per platform. The denominator is the 12 validly measured domains per platform.
| Platform | Brand mention rate | Own-domain citation rate |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT | 33% | 8% |
| Perplexity | 83% | 42% |
| Gemini | 83% | 83% |
ChatGPT showed the lowest mention rate of the three platforms — suggesting that brands lacking third-party assets that surface in search results (comparisons, reviews, wikis) tend not to get mentioned at all.
Citation Source Patterns
Top third-party sources cited in AI answers (sample domains excluded). Video, blog platforms, wikis, and IT media rank highest.
| Host | Citations |
|---|---|
| youtube.com | 14 |
| impactflow.kr | 13 |
| reviewinsight.blog | 11 |
| tistory.com | 11 |
| blog.naver.com | 10 |
| etnews.com | 10 |
| namu.wiki | 10 |
| zdnet.co.kr | 10 |
| daouoffice.com | 8 |
| comworld.co.kr | 7 |
Interpretation & Priorities
- • Observation — top-tier brands tend to be mentioned evenly across all three platforms and are also cited on third-party surfaces such as wikis, reviews, and media.
- • Observation — for bottom-tier (D) domains, answers were generated in full richness yet the brand simply never appeared. The list of sources already cited in category answers works as an entry map.
- • Priority — optimizing your own site alone appears insufficient to earn ChatGPT mentions. Consider establishing presence on the top-cited source types (comparison/review content, wiki-style documents, industry media). This is an observed pattern, not a guaranteed causal prescription.
FAQ
How visible are Korean B2B SaaS brands in AI search?
In this 12-domain sample the median score is 51/100, with 5 domains at grade A and 2 not mentioned (D). This is an initial public-web sample — do not generalize to the whole industry.
Why doesn't my brand appear in ChatGPT answers?
In this measurement, ChatGPT mentioned brands in 33% of cases versus 83% on Perplexity and Gemini. Brands lacking third-party documents that surface in search (comparisons, reviews, wikis, media) appear most affected — individual causes vary by domain.
Why do results differ by platform?
Each platform consults different sources and cites differently when building answers. In this measurement, Gemini cited brands' own domains most often (83%), while ChatGPT was lowest on both mention and citation rates.
My score is low — what should I do first?
The order observed in this data: ① check which source types get cited for your category queries ② verify your brand exists on those surfaces (comparison/review content, wiki-style documents, industry media) ③ strengthen evidence assets on your own site (sources and statistics included). You can start with a measurement-based checkup below.
Can I see my company's ranking?
No. This report is a fully anonymized aggregate and does not disclose individual brand rankings. To find where you stand, run your own measurement and compare your grade (A-D) against the category distribution.
What types of content do AI answers cite?
In this measurement, video platforms (YouTube), blog platforms (Naver Blog, Tistory), wiki-style documents (Namuwiki), and IT media were the top cited sources. Third-party surfaces outweigh brands' own domains — the full top list is in the citation source patterns table above.
Limitations
- • Aggregated from 12 domains sampled from the public web — not product telemetry and not a representative sample of the whole industry.
- • AI answers vary by model, timing, and question. In same-day repeat runs, individual scores moved within roughly ±10 points and 1 of 12 domains changed grade. A single result does not guarantee long-term trends or business outcomes.
- • Based on a single measurement date (2026-07-23); given the small sample, sub-vertical breakdowns and fine-grained percentile reads are limited.
Data Download
Which grade would your domain get in this category?
Measure your brand's AI answer mentions and citations under the same conditions and see where your grade (A-D) sits in the category distribution.
Measure your brand visibility →