Been tracking our AI visibility and noticed something interesting.
Branded queries (e.g., “What is [Our Company]?”):
Non-branded queries (e.g., “Best [category] software”):
My questions:
The growth marketer in me says focus on non-branded (that’s where new customers are). But maybe I’m missing something.
This gap is very common. Let me explain why it exists and how to think about it.
Why the gap exists:
| Query Type | What AI Needs | Your Advantage |
|---|---|---|
| Branded | Entity information about YOU | You control your own story |
| Non-Branded | Comparative category knowledge | You’re one of many |
For branded queries:
AI needs to know what YOU are. You have inherent advantages:
For non-branded queries:
AI needs to recommend within a category. You compete with:
Which to prioritize:
It depends on your growth model:
| Business Model | Priority | Why |
|---|---|---|
| High brand awareness, low market share | Non-branded | Need discovery |
| Low brand awareness, new market | Non-branded | Need to be found |
| High market share, defending position | Both equally | Maintain visibility |
| Niche player, focused offering | Non-branded (niche) | Own your specialty |
Your 85%/25% split suggests strong brand but weak category presence. Focus on non-branded.
They overlap but have different emphases.
Branded optimization:
Non-branded optimization:
The overlap:
Key difference:
Branded = Make AI understand YOUR entity well Non-branded = Make AI see you as a CATEGORY authority
You need different content strategies for each.
Non-branded visibility requires different content.
Content types that drive non-branded visibility:
Why this works:
These are the content formats that:
What doesn’t work:
Product pages alone. “Buy our CRM” doesn’t answer “Best CRM software.”
You need content that:
Our approach:
We create category content where we’re the obvious recommendation, not sales content where we’re trying to sell.
Competitive analysis perspective.
What your competitors are probably doing better:
For non-branded queries, they likely have:
How to analyze:
Common gaps we find:
| You Have | They Have | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Product pages | Category guides | They win category queries |
| Blog about you | Blog about industry | They show topical authority |
| Your customers reviews | Reviews on comparison sites | They have third-party validation |
The competitive intelligence:
Am I Cited shows competitor performance on the same queries. Critical for understanding what to build.
B2B SaaS perspective where this is critical.
Our funnel reality:
If we only win branded:
We only appear when people already know us. We miss the discovery phase entirely.
Our non-branded strategy:
Results after 8 months:
| Query Type | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Branded | 82% | 88% |
| Non-branded | 18% | 47% |
| Non-branded position | 4.2 | 2.3 |
The growth impact:
Demo requests with “discovered through AI” source increased 300%.
Non-branded is where the growth is.
Startup perspective - we’re all non-branded.
Our situation:
Brand awareness is near zero. No one’s searching for us by name.
100% of our AI strategy is non-branded queries.
What works for startups:
Example:
Instead of trying to win “best project management software” (impossible), we target:
Results:
The lesson:
Non-branded doesn’t mean “broad category.” It means “category without your name.” Find the specific non-branded queries you can actually win.
Enterprise perspective - we have the opposite problem.
Our situation:
Strong brand recognition. Strong category presence. But AI wasn’t connecting them.
The gap:
When people asked “What is [our brand]?” - Great response. When people asked “Best [category] for enterprise?” - We were mentioned but not first.
What we discovered:
Our brand content and our category content weren’t connected. AI saw us as a brand but not as a category leader.
The fix:
The insight:
You need explicit content connecting your brand TO the category. Don’t assume AI will make that connection.
Data perspective on branded vs non-branded.
What we track:
For 50+ clients, we monitor:
Findings:
| Branded Performance | Non-Branded Performance | Common? |
|---|---|---|
| High | High | 25% |
| High | Low | 40% |
| Low | High | 15% |
| Low | Low | 20% |
The insight:
High branded + low non-branded (your situation) is the most common. Your brand content works, category content needs work.
Correlation analysis:
Branded and non-branded performance have only moderate correlation (0.35). They’re somewhat independent signals.
Practical implication:
You can improve non-branded without worrying about branded. And you need specific non-branded strategy - branded success won’t spill over automatically.
Great clarity from this discussion. My takeaways:
Key insights:
My strategy:
Priority 1: Non-branded visibility (growth focus)
Priority 2: Maintain branded visibility (don’t neglect)
Content plan:
| Content Type | Goal |
|---|---|
| “[Category] Complete Guide” | Category authority |
| “[Brand] vs [Competitor]” | Comparison visibility |
| “Best [Category] for [Use Case]” | Niche non-branded |
| “How to [Solve Problem]” | Problem-first discovery |
Tracking:
Use Am I Cited to monitor both query types separately. Different dashboards for each.
Thanks everyone - clear direction now.
Get personalized help from our team. We'll respond within 24 hours.
Övervaka ditt varumärkes synlighet för både varumärkesrelaterade och icke-varumärkesrelaterade AI-frågor. Se hur du presterar över olika sökintentioner.
Diskussion i communityn om hur varumärkeskännedom och varumärkeskapital översätts till synlighet i AI-sök. Har etablerade varumärken fördelar i AI?
Diskussion i communityt om att optimera för icke-varumärkesrelaterade AI-sökningar. Konkreta strategier för att bli citerad när användare söker lösningar snarar...
Communitydiskussion om overvakning av varumarkessynlighet i AI-genererade svar. Verkliga erfarenheter fran marknadsfOrare som sparar varumarkesomnaemanden, posi...
