Price Comparison Sites,
according to AI
Every week we ask ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini the questions real UK consumers ask about price comparison sites — and record exactly which brands they put forward. Right now, Money.co.uk owns the conversation.
0 AI answers this run · 0 brands named · measured, never estimated
Money.co.uk is the default answer.
Named in 27% of price comparison sites answers, typically in position 1.8. Compare the Market follows at 13%, MoneySuperMarket at 12%.
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.
| # | Brand | Visibility | Avg. position | Citation share | Read→cited |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Money.co.uk | 27% | 1.8 | 3% | 0% |
| 2 | Compare the Market | 13% | 1.8 | 5% | 50% |
| 3 | MoneySuperMarket | 12% | 2.9 | 12% | 75% |
| 4 | Confused.com | 10% | 2.7 | 8% | 100% |
| 5 | Money Saving Expert | 7% | 1.3 | 34% | 50% |
| 6 | Which? | 7% | 2.5 | 11% | 67% |
| 7 | Go.Compare | 7% | 3.8 | 5% | 50% |
| 8 | Finder | 3% | 3.0 | 3% | 50% |
| 9 | Tesco Bank | 3% | 5.0 | 2% | 100% |
| 10 | Homebox | 2% | 1.0 | 2% | — |
| 11 | Please Connect Me | 2% | 2.0 | 3% | 50% |
| 12 | Money To The Masses | 2% | 3.0 | 2% | 50% |
| 13 | Moneyfacts Compare | 2% | 4.0 | 2% | 33% |
| 14 | Forbes Advisor | 2% | 6.0 | 0% | — |
| 15 | NimbleFins | 0% | — | 2% | 100% |
Money.co.uk is named most. That is not the same as being wanted.
Being named is visibility. Underneath it, every answer describes a brand in three ways — how much it stands out, how much it belongs, and how much it is returned to. In price comparison sites, Money Saving Expert leads affinity at 107 against CompareNI at 78, indexed on the category at 100.
Each whorl lights one ring per index threshold cleared. See the full price comparison sites desire edition →
Before it answers, it goes looking for Money Saving Expert.
An assistant does not answer from memory alone. It runs its own web searches first, and whoever it searches for is the shortlist it then chooses from. Across 73 searches in price comparison sites, Money Saving Expert is named in 100% of the ones that name a brand at all. ChatGPT Web does not report its searches, so these shares are measured against the ones that do.
These are the assistants' own searches, read from their answers — not what anyone typed into a search engine.
The referees of price comparison sites.
The independent sources AI models cite when answering price comparison sites questions — the places a brand needs to be seen, reviewed and ranked.
MoneySuperMarket converts reads into citations. Moneyfacts Compare doesn't.
When Claude or ChatGPT opens a brand's own pages while answering, does the page make the cited-sources list? MoneySuperMarket converts 75% of reads; Moneyfacts Compare just 33%. That gap is a content problem, not a visibility problem.
Full data table
| # | Brand | Visibility | Avg. position | Citation share | Read→cited |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Money.co.uk | 27% | 1.8 | 3% | 0% |
| 2 | Compare the Market | 13% | 1.8 | 5% | 50% |
| 3 | MoneySuperMarket | 12% | 2.9 | 12% | 75% |
| 4 | Confused.com | 10% | 2.7 | 8% | 100% |
| 5 | Money Saving Expert | 7% | 1.3 | 34% | 50% |
| 6 | Which? | 7% | 2.5 | 11% | 67% |
| 7 | Go.Compare | 7% | 3.8 | 5% | 50% |
| 8 | Finder | 3% | 3.0 | 3% | 50% |
| 9 | Tesco Bank | 3% | 5.0 | 2% | 100% |
| 10 | Homebox | 2% | 1.0 | 2% | — |
| 11 | Please Connect Me | 2% | 2.0 | 3% | 50% |
| 12 | Money To The Masses | 2% | 3.0 | 2% | 50% |
| 13 | Moneyfacts Compare | 2% | 4.0 | 2% | 33% |
| 14 | Forbes Advisor | 2% | 6.0 | 0% | — |
| 15 | NimbleFins | 0% | — | 2% | 100% |
The models do not agree on who leads.
Ask about price comparison sites and the brand you are shown depends on the assistant: Claude → Money.co.uk, Gemini → Money.co.uk, ChatGPT → Money Saving Expert. Their top-five lists share just 9% of names.
Brands whose visibility swings most between models — the bar per model, widest gap on the right.
The data behind this chart
| Brand | Claude | Gemini | ChatGPT | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compare the Market | 0% | 35% | 5% | 35pp |
| Confused.com | 0% | 30% | 0% | 30pp |
| Money.co.uk | 30% | 35% | 15% | 20pp |
| MoneySuperMarket | 10% | 20% | 5% | 15pp |
| Go.Compare | 0% | 15% | 5% | 15pp |
| Money Saving Expert | 0% | 5% | 15% | 15pp |
| Money To The Masses | 5% | 0% | 0% | 5pp |
| Forbes Advisor | 5% | 0% | 0% | 5pp |
| Finder | 5% | 0% | 5% | 5pp |
| Which? | 5% | 5% | 10% | 5pp |
Editorial carry price comparison sites.
Every page AI opened while answering, classified by what kind of page it is. Editorial supply the most citations; How-to guides convert best — 95% of the ones models opened were actually cited.
The data behind this chart
| Page type | Cited | Read but not cited | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Editorial | 72 | 11 | 87% |
| How-to guides | 70 | 4 | 95% |
| Comparisons | 28 | 4 | 88% |
| Product pages | 13 | 1 | 93% |
| Documentation | 7 | 5 | 58% |
| Community threads | 6 | 2 | 75% |
| Other | 6 | 5 | 55% |
Structured data is what separates cited from ignored.
Of the price comparison sites pages models actually opened, how much more often each feature's pages ended up in the cited sources. Structured data is worth 5 percentage points; hard statistics pages fare 5pp worse. Measured within the read population, so selection can't flatter it.
The data behind this chart
| Feature | Pages with | Cited % | Pages without | Cited % | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Structured data | 211 | 86% | 65 | 82% | +5pp |
| Comparison table | 82 | 83% | 194 | 86% | -3pp |
| Named author | 126 | 83% | 150 | 87% | -3pp |
| Answer up front | 161 | 83% | 115 | 88% | -5pp |
| Updated this year | 124 | 82% | 152 | 88% | -5pp |
| Hard statistics | 98 | 82% | 178 | 87% | -5pp |
Finder 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. Compare the Market is the widest gap: well-built pages that still aren't converting into citations.
| Brand | Readiness | Pages cited | Pages profiled |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finder | 61 | 22% | 9 |
| MoneySuperMarket | 51 | 6% | 125 |
| Quotezone | 50 | 14% | 7 |
| Money Saving Expert | 49 | 13% | 135 |
| Money To The Masses | 48 | 14% | 7 |
| Compare the Market | 48 | 3% | 118 |
| Which? | 45 | 26% | 27 |
| Uswitch | 42 | 20% | 25 |
| Moneyfacts Compare | 40 | 20% | 5 |
| Confused.com | 38 | 3% | 115 |
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.
The questions price comparison sites 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.
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 Wed, 02 Sep 2026 09:27:06 GMT.