BrandInsightAI Insights
Energy · a live data story

Fuel & EV Charging,
according to AI

Every week we ask ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini the questions real UK consumers ask about fuel & ev charging — and record exactly which brands they put forward. Right now, BP owns the conversation.

0 AI answers this run · 0 brands named · measured, never estimated

The podium

BP is the default answer.

Named in 28% of fuel & ev charging answers, typically in position 3.2. Tesla follows at 25%, Shell at 23%.

Tesla
25% of answers
BP
28% of answers
Shell
23% of answers
The full board

Every brand AI names, ranked.

Visibility is the share of answers naming the brand; citation share is its slice of all brand-owned pages cited; read→cited is how often its pages convert a read into a citation.

#BrandVisibilityAvg. positionCitation shareRead→cited
1BP 28% 3.2 0% —
2Tesla 25% 2.0 0% —
3Shell 23% 3.6 11% 29%
4Extra 22% 3.4 0% —
5Tesco 17% 1.6 0% 0%
6InstaVolt 17% 2.6 0% —
7GRIDSERVE 13% 2.8 11% 100%
8Sainsbury's 13% 3.0 0% —
9Osprey Charging 12% 3.7 6% 100%
10Morrisons 12% 4.3 0% —
11Fastned 10% 3.3 0% —
12Asda 8% 2.2 0% —
13Esso 8% 3.8 6% 100%
14MFG 8% 3.8 0% —
15Pod Point 7% 2.5 0% —
What AI wants here

BP is named most. That is not the same as being wanted.

Being named is visibility. Underneath it, asked to rate each brand directly, the AI assistants judge it three ways — how much it stands out, how much it belongs, and how much it is returned to. They put 13% of the 38 brands rated above indifference. Costco leads the brands the answers name, at 72% of maximum Desire. On attachment, the most divided driver, Sainsbury's indexes 141 against LubiQ Fuels at 58, on a category average of 100.

Attachment
Sainsbury's141
LubiQ Fuels58
83-point spread
Attraction
Costco140
LubiQ Fuels65
75-point spread
Affinity
Costco126
LubiQ Fuels70
56-point spread
Costco: Attraction 140, Affinity 126, Attachment 134
Costco
Above indifference · Ahead on all three
Sainsbury's: Attraction 124, Affinity 122, Attachment 141
Sainsbury's
Above indifference · Ahead on all three
Tesla: Attraction 139, Affinity 107, Attachment 135
Tesla
Above indifference · Chosen, not loved
AttractionAffinityAttachment

Each whorl lights one ring per index threshold cleared (84 / 92 / 100 / 108 / 116). Above indifference means Desire above two-thirds of its maximum. See the full fuel & ev charging desire edition →

Who AI trusts here

The referees of fuel & ev charging.

The independent sources AI models cite when answering fuel & ev charging questions — the places a brand needs to be seen, reviewed and ranked.

youtube.com 13 cites
reddit.com 12 cites
zapmap.com 12 cites
which.co.uk 8 cites
gov.uk 5 cites
electriccarscheme.com 4 cites
evcompared.co.uk 4 cites
petrolprices.co.uk 4 cites
podenergy.com 4 cites
rac.co.uk 4 cites
Read is not cited

Shell converts reads into citations.

When Claude or ChatGPT opens a brand's own pages while answering, does the page make the cited-sources list? Shell converts 29% of reads. That gap is a content problem, not a visibility problem.

Shell · read 7×29%
Full data table
#BrandVisibilityAvg. positionCitation shareRead→cited
1BP28%3.20%—
2Tesla25%2.00%—
3Shell23%3.611%29%
4Extra22%3.40%—
5Tesco17%1.60%0%
6InstaVolt17%2.60%—
7GRIDSERVE13%2.811%100%
8Sainsbury's13%3.00%—
9Osprey Charging12%3.76%100%
10Morrisons12%4.30%—
11Fastned10%3.30%—
12Asda8%2.20%—
13Esso8%3.86%100%
14MFG8%3.80%—
15Pod Point7%2.50%—
Which AI you ask

Three models. Three different answers.

Ask about fuel & ev charging and the brand you are shown depends on the assistant: Claude → Sainsbury's, Gemini → Extra, ChatGPT → BP. Their top-five lists share just 43% of names.

Claude recommends
Sainsbury's
named in 25% of its answers
Gemini recommends
Extra
named in 35% of its answers
ChatGPT recommends
BP
named in 25% of its answers

Brands whose visibility swings most between models — the bar per model, widest gap on the right.

Sainsbury's 25pp
Extra 25pp
MFG 20pp
Shell 15pp
Tesla 15pp
Tesco 15pp
InstaVolt 15pp
Morrisons 15pp
ClaudeGeminiChatGPT
The data behind this chart
BrandClaudeGeminiChatGPTSpread
Sainsbury's25%15%0%25pp
Extra10%35%20%25pp
MFG0%20%5%20pp
Shell25%30%15%15pp
Tesla20%35%20%15pp
Tesco15%25%10%15pp
InstaVolt10%25%15%15pp
Morrisons10%20%5%15pp
Osprey Charging5%20%10%15pp
BP25%35%25%10pp
What AI reads here

How-to guides carry fuel & ev charging.

Every page AI opened while answering, classified by what kind of page it is. How-to guides supply the most citations; How-to guides convert best — 94% of the ones models opened were actually cited.

How-to guides
131 cited · 9 read only
94% of reads cited
Editorial
126 cited · 71 read only
64% of reads cited
Community threads
62 cited · 16 read only
79% of reads cited
Product pages
58 cited · 12 read only
83% of reads cited
Comparisons
50 cited · 15 read only
77% of reads cited
Listicles
25 cited · 8 read only
76% of reads cited
News
21 cited · 22 read only
49% of reads cited
Other
19 cited · 48 read only
28% of reads cited
The data behind this chart
Page typeCitedRead but not citedConversion
How-to guides131994%
Editorial1267164%
Community threads621679%
Product pages581283%
Comparisons501577%
Listicles25876%
News212249%
Other194828%
What gets cited

Specifications is what separates cited from ignored.

Of the fuel & ev charging pages models actually opened, how much more often each feature's pages ended up in the cited sources. Specifications is worth 16 percentage points; cites its sources pages fare 42pp worse. Measured within the read population, so selection can't flatter it.

Specifications +16pp
Structured data +13pp
Answer up front -1pp
Named author -1pp
Hard statistics -9pp
Comparison table -17pp
Updated this year -19pp
Cites its sources -42pp
The data behind this chart
FeaturePages withCited %Pages withoutCited %Difference
Specifications19182%64467%+16pp
Structured data58474%25161%+13pp
Answer up front36570%47071%-1pp
Named author42770%40871%-1pp
Hard statistics39566%44074%-9pp
Comparison table25058%58575%-17pp
Updated this year28058%55577%-19pp
Cites its sources8033%75574%-42pp
Citation readiness

Beesley Fuels builds pages AI can quote.

Readiness scores each brand's own pages on the structure models reward — a direct answer up front, tables, hard numbers, named authors, structured data, recency, specifications. Prema Energy is the widest gap: well-built pages that still aren't converting into citations.

BrandReadinessPages citedPages profiled
Beesley Fuels 84 75% 4
Nationwide Fuels 71 33% 3
Crown Oil 68 71% 7
Speedy Fuels 63 100% 3
GRIDSERVE 60 67% 9
Prema Energy 46 0% 3
Certas Energy 43 86% 7
Welcome Break 42 0% 3
InstaVolt 40 0% 97
LubiQ Fuels 39 15% 13

Readiness is the share of eight measurable structural signals present on a brand's profiled pages. It is a build-quality measure, not a ranking of the brand.

What the answers answer

The questions fuel & ev charging pages have to settle.

Read straight off the pages AI cited: the consumer questions cited content answers most often. Content that fails to settle these is content models have no reason to quote.

What is HVO fuel?
How long does it take to charge an electric car?
How do you charge an electric car?
What are the best motorway service stations in the UK?
What is E10 petrol?
What is the Renewable Fuels Assurance Scheme (RFAS)?
What is premium fuel?
What is Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO)?
Keep exploring

Nineteen more categories.

Method: 20 unbranded consumer prompts per category, spread across the buying journey, run weekly against ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini. Read→cited uses Claude and ChatGPT only (Gemini does not separate the two). Correlational observations of model behaviour at the time of the run. Data from the run completed Sat, 17 Oct 2026 13:09:31 GMT.

scroll ↓