mapou Visibility Index · Home Improvement → Home Appliances · May 2026
Which home appliances brands does AI cite most?
When buyers ask AI assistants questions like “What are the best home appliance brands to consider for kitchen and laundry, including refrigerators, ranges, ovens, dishwashers, washers, dryers, microwaves, and cooktops across different price tiers?” or “Best affordable kitchen and laundry appliances under $800?”, a small set of home appliancesget cited every time. Most don't. This report measures which.
How we measured. MVI is a 0–100 score per brand: 0 means AI never cites you in home appliances, 100 means it cites you in every prompt. We tested 20 brands across 5 AI assistants (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok) using 20 fixed prompts, reused every monthly run for replicability.
How we describe AI visibility
- Stage 1, First encounter. The brand is discovered and cited occasionally in AI answers for buyer-intent prompts.
- Stage 2, Repeat use. The brand is cited regularly enough that it feels familiar and reliably present across prompts and engines.
- Stage 3, Default choice. The brand is the go-to recommendation in AI answers within its segment, often appearing first or most consistently.
Bottom line
LG leads home appliances on AI search visibility with MVI 84, sitting firmly in the default-choice tier, in a tight race with Bosch (MVI 77).
Who AI cites most
LG is cited in 82 of 100 prompt-engine pairs (82%). 95% confidence interval 76-90.
Concentration
The top 3 brands (LG, Bosch, Samsung) capture 35% of all citations in this segment. 7 of 20 tracked brands are cited in fewer than 1 in 10 prompt-engine pairs.
Where the field sits
Of 20 brands tested: 2 in default-choice, 4 in repeat-use, 5 in first-encounter, 9 not yet cited. Overall, AI cites a brand from this segment in 32% of buyer-intent prompt-engine pairs.
Engine asymmetry
Miele is cited in 83% of Claude prompts but only 35% on Grok, visibility is engine-specific, not universal.
Notable absence
Dacor is not yet cited, 0 prompts across all 100 prompt-engine pairs. A recognizable brand AI is not yet surfacing.
Analyst note
LG leads the home appliance segment with an MVI of 84, 7 points ahead of Bosch.
LG has a clear lead in the home appliance segment with an MVI of 84. It excels in the discovery phase at 95, showing strong initial consumer interest. Bosch follows with an MVI of 77, performing best on ChatGPT with a score of 90. Samsung is in the foothold tier with an MVI of 73, particularly strong in discovery at 85. There are nine invisible brands, showing a drop-off beyond the leaders and foothold brands.
Risk:Samsung's visibility is uneven across engines, with a low of 53 on Perplexity, which could threaten its foothold status.
Headline finding
LG leads home appliances on AI search visibility with MVI 84, sitting firmly in the default-choice tier.
Average MVI
34
Default choice
2
Of 20 brands
Repeat use
4
First encounter
5
Not yet cited
9
Citation rate per engine
How often each engine cites a brand from this category as a recommendation, averaged across all 20 brands tested.
ChatGPT
33%
16 / 20 brands cited at least once
Perplexity
31%
19 / 20 brands cited at least once
Gemini
33%
17 / 20 brands cited at least once
Claude
39%
17 / 20 brands cited at least once
Grok
26%
12 / 20 brands cited at least once
Phase strength across the category
Which buyer-intent phases are easiest vs hardest to win in home appliances. Citation rate averaged across all brands tested. Phase weights are part of the MVI formula.
Discovery · 30%
36%
Top: LG
Filtered discovery · 25%
32%
Top: LG
Comparison · 25%
28%
Top: LG
Evaluation · 20%
32%
Top: LG
Who wins which buyer phase
Top 12brands by MVI mapped against the four buyer-intent phases. Each cell shows the brand's citation rate for that phase, color-coded so the visual pattern tells the story: a brand strong across all four phases reads as a horizontal orange band; a brand strong only at Discovery but weak at Evaluation reads as a left-heavy gradient. This is the segment's findings against the panel.
| Brand | MVI | Discovery | Filtered | Comparison | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LG | 84 | 95% | 80% | 78% | 83% |
| Bosch | 77 | 83% | 72% | 75% | 75% |
| Samsung | 73 | 85% | 62% | 68% | 78% |
| Whirlpool | 65 | 77% | 55% | 48% | 80% |
| Miele | 62 | 63% | 63% | 75% | 43% |
| GE Appliances | 61 | 72% | 53% | 45% | 73% |
| KitchenAid | 45 | 45% | 42% | 43% | 50% |
| Sub-Zero | 43 | 40% | 47% | 55% | 30% |
| Maytag | 39 | 55% | 27% | 13% | 63% |
| Wolf | 34 | 23% | 50% | 38% | 28% |
| Thermador | 25 | 20% | 33% | 28% | 18% |
| Frigidaire | 21 | 27% | 25% | 13% | 20% |
How to read it. Strong horizontal band = durable brand, AI cites it across the entire funnel. Left-heavy gradient = brand with awareness (Discovery) but weak recommendation (Evaluation), the demand-leak pattern from Finding 03. Right-heavy gradient = brand AI considers in Comparison and Evaluation but does not surface in initial Discovery, the anti-leak pattern. Color steps: dark orange ≥75%, orange ≥50%, peach ≥30%, light ≥10%, beige >0%, neutral 0%.
For CMOs in home appliances
What this report means for your home appliances portfolio
Each bullet is a category-specific decision derived from this month's data, with the mapou service that operationalizes it.
Concentration risk
In home appliances, AI effectively recommends 12.1 of 20 tracked brands. The top brand captures 12% of citations. The next 2 capture another 12%. Visibility is concentrated but not winner-takes-all.
How mapou helps: GEO & Citation Architecture restructures your entity data so you can break into the top set.
Engine convergence
Unusually for our panel, home appliances engines mostly agree. Cross-engine correlation is 0.90 (1.0 = perfect). Improvements on one engine are likely to lift others. Lower-effort optimization than fragmented categories.
How mapou helps: AI Visibility Audit confirms your position is consistent across engines before you commit budget.
Visibility tier landscape
In home appliances, 2 of 20 tracked brands clear MVI 75 (default-choice tier). 9 are below MVI 25 (not yet cited). The strategy differs at each tier. If you are below 25, you need foundational visibility infrastructure before tactical optimization.
How mapou helps: AI Visibility Audit identifies your tier; GEO & Citation Architecture moves you up.
The mapou Visibility Index
What is MVI?
The mapou Visibility Index (MVI) is a 0-100 proprietary score combining four weighted dimensions: Discovery (open recommendations, 30%), Filtered Discovery (budget, persona, use-case, 25%), Comparison (head-to-head authority, 25%), and Evaluation (decision-criteria authority, 20%).
Citations count fully; mentions count at half weight. Engines are equally weighted (no market-share gymnastics). Wilson 95% confidence intervals are shown alongside every score. The same 20 prompts run every month so MVI deltas are paired comparisons, not noise.
How to read this ranking
- Default choice (MVI 75+). AI's go-to recommendation in home appliances. The tier other brands are competing into.
- Repeat use (50–74). Cited often enough to feel reliably present across prompts and engines. One signal away from default.
- First encounter (25–49). Discovered and cited occasionally, but visibility is inconsistent. The brand is real to AI, not yet trusted.
- Not yet cited (0–24). AI does not surface this brand for buyer-intent prompts in home appliances. Effectively invisible in AI-driven discovery.
Ranked by MVI score (Wilson 95% CI shown). The Spread column shows the gap between each brand's best and worst engine, under 15pp is durable, 50pp+ is engine-dependent. Per-engine columns show the count of prompts where each engine cited the brand as a recommendation (out of 20). Read each column as a signal: when ChatGPT cites you but Gemini doesn't, your gap is engine-specific. When all five miss you, the gap is foundational.
| # | Brand | MVI | 95% CI | Spread | Per-engine | ChatGPT | Perplexity | Gemini | Claude | Grok | Tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ▲ Discovery (28/30) · current-year picks (5/5) ▼ Comparison (15/20) · budget-friendly (2/5) | 84 | 76–90 | 15pp | 16 | 15 | 16 | 18 | 17 | Default choice | |
| 2 | ▲ Discovery (25/30) · open recommendation (5/5) ▼ Filtered Discovery (21/30) · budget-friendly (1/5) | 77 | 67–84 | 25pp | 18 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 16 | Default choice | |
| 3 | ▲ Discovery (25/30) · open recommendation (5/5) ▼ Filtered Discovery (18/30) · filtered values driven (0/5) | 73 | 64–81 | 40pp | 16 | 8 | 14 | 16 | 14 | Repeat use | |
| 4 | ▲ Evaluation (14/20) · open recommendation (5/5) ▼ Comparison (8/20) · emerging brands (0/5) | 65 | 55–74 | 20pp | 14 | 11 | 10 | 12 | 14 | Repeat use | |
| 5 | ▲ Comparison (14/20) · top-brands lists (5/5) ▼ Evaluation (8/20) · budget-friendly (0/5) | 62 | 52–70 | 45pp | 14 | 9 | 14 | 16 | 7 | Repeat use | |
| 6 | ▲ Evaluation (13/20) · open recommendation (5/5) ▼ Comparison (7/20) · premium (0/5) | 61 | 51–70 | 30pp | 9 | 14 | 8 | 13 | 12 | Repeat use | |
| 7 | ▲ Evaluation (9/20) · filtered persona beginner (5/5) | 45 | 35–54 | 25pp | 11 | 8 | 6 | 10 | 6 | First encounter | |
| 8 | ▲ Comparison (10/20) · premium (5/5) ▼ Evaluation (6/20) · popular brands (0/5) | 43 | 34–53 | 45pp | 7 | 5 | 14 | 11 | 5 | First encounter | |
| 9 | ▲ Evaluation (12/20) · top-brands lists (4/5) ▼ Comparison (2/20) · premium (0/5) | 39 | 30–49 | 30pp | 6 | 7 | 7 | 12 | 6 | First encounter | |
| 10 | ▲ Filtered Discovery (15/30) · premium (5/5) ▼ Discovery (6/30) · current-year picks (0/5) | 34 | 26–45 | 30pp | 5 | 7 | 10 | 7 | 4 | First encounter | |
| 11 | ▲ Filtered Discovery (10/30) · filtered persona pro (4/5) ▼ Evaluation (3/20) · open recommendation (0/5) | 25 | 18–34 | 40pp | 1 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 3 | First encounter | |
| 12 | ▲ Discovery (8/30) · discovery recommendation request (3/5) ▼ Comparison (2/20) · current-year picks (0/5) | 21 | 15–31 | 40pp | 8 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 13 | ▲ Comparison (5/20) · filtered persona pro (2/5) ▼ Discovery (1/30) · open recommendation (0/5) | 15 | 9–22 | 35pp | 3 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 14 | ▲ Evaluation (2/20) · emerging brands (2/5) | 10 | 5–17 | 10pp | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | Not yet cited | |
| 15 | ▲ Discovery (4/30) · discovery recommendation request (2/5) ▼ Filtered Discovery (1/30) · current-year picks (0/5) | 9 | 5–16 | 20pp | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 16 | ▲ Discovery (3/30) · emerging brands (3/5) | 5 | 2–11 | 15pp | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 17 | ▲ Evaluation (1/20) · premium (1/5) | 4 | 2–10 | 10pp | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 18 | ▲ Filtered Discovery (2/30) · popular brands (1/5) | 4 | 2–10 | 10pp | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 19 | ▲ Comparison (1/20) · emerging brands (1/5) | 3 | 1–8 | 5pp | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Not yet cited | |
| 20 | Dacor ▲ Evaluation (0/20) | 1 | 0–5 | 0pp | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Not yet cited |
Strategic insights for home appliances
Five derived metrics computed from the same data, surfacing how this segment behaves on AI search. See the State of AI Search for cross-segment comparison.
Engine agreement
0.90
Broad consensus
Effective brands
12.1 / 20
Wide open · top 2 take 24%
Top demand-leak brand
Miele
+21pp Discovery vs Evaluation
Top mention-only brand
Café
27% of visibility is mention-only
Kingmaker engine by funnel phase
discovery
ChatGPT
100pp spread
filtered
ChatGPT
100pp spread
comparison
ChatGPT
100pp spread
evaluation
ChatGPT
100pp spread
For each phase, the engine where the gap between most-cited and least-cited brand is widest, i.e. where positioning matters most. Win that engine, win that phase.
Brands cited most across the category
Aggregated across every (brand × prompt × engine) combination tested. The most-cited brands here are the names AI consistently surfaces when buyers ask about home appliances.
Emerging brands AI is citing in home appliances
Brand names AI engines surfaced for home appliances prompts that are not currently on the mapou tracked panel. Ranked by mention count and engine breadth. These are panel candidates, brands AI considers part of the category even though we are not yet measuring them.
Method. Aggregated across the canonical run for home appliances. For every (panel brand × prompt × engine) we record the brand names the analyzer extracted (capped at 6 per response), then drop names that match the tracked panel or its aliases, plus a denylist of generic category terms. Threshold to qualify: at least 3 mentions across at least 2 of 5 engines. Click any row to see the AI quote that surfaced the brand. Some entries may be tracked elsewhere on mapou but not in this segment, in which case AI considers them cross-category competitors. Reviewed monthly to inform panel additions.
How home appliances rankings shift by buyer demographic
We re-ran the same 20 canonical prompts under eight demographic system-prompt variants: gender (men, women) crossed with generation (Gen Z 18-29, Millennial 30-45, Gen X 46-61, Boomer 62+). Age ranges follow Pew Research boundaries. The system prompt names the age range only; the labels here are descriptive.
| Brand | Gen Z M | Gen Z W | Mill. M | Mill. W | Gen X M | Gen X W | Boomer M | Boomer W |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bosch | 95% | 100% | 95% | 100% | 90% | 95% | 95% | 90% |
| LG | 95% | 95% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 75% | 95% | 85% |
| Samsung | 90% | 90% | 95% | 90% | 80% | 80% | 90% | 90% |
| Whirlpool | 75% | 75% | 85% | 75% | 80% | 85% | 75% | 85% |
Each cell is the citation rate (out of 20 canonical prompts) for that brand under that demographic system prompt, ChatGPT only. “n/a” means the brand is not in that cell's top-3 (full ranked data is paid-tier). Top 8 brands by mean rate across demographics shown. The macro view of this measurement is on the State of AI Search page.
The 20-prompt taxonomy
Every brand in this report is tested against the same 20 canonical prompts, spanning the four MVI dimensions (Discovery, Filtered Discovery, Comparison, Evaluation). The prompt set is fixed at methodology v1.0 and reused every monthly run, so MVI deltas are paired comparisons not noise.
The exact prompt templates and phase-weighting formula are part of mapou's proprietary methodology, shared with paying clients alongside custom benchmarks for their specific brand.
See the framework →Methodology v1.0. MVI is mapou's proprietary 0-100 visibility score across 5 AI engines and 4 buyer-intent dimensions. 95% Wilson confidence intervals. Equal engine weighting. See the framework →
Run yours
Want to see your brand on this leaderboard? Run a free visibility check on your own brand. We'll show you exactly which prompts you're missing and which engines are losing you the most ground.