Productivity Apps,
according to AI
Every week we ask ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini the questions real UK consumers ask about productivity apps — and record exactly which brands they put forward. Right now, Apple Notes owns the conversation.
0 AI answers this run · 0 brands named · measured, never estimated
Apple Notes is the default answer.
Named in 58% of productivity apps answers, typically in position 3.3. Apple Reminders follows at 52%, Google Keep at 48%.
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 | Apple Notes | 58% | 3.3 | 19% | 40% |
| 2 | Apple Reminders | 52% | 4.1 | 0% | — |
| 3 | Google Keep | 48% | 3.8 | 4% | 17% |
| 4 | Notion | 40% | 5.0 | 1% | 100% |
| 5 | Microsoft To Do | 33% | 3.8 | 0% | — |
| 6 | Things 3 | 32% | 4.9 | 1% | 8% |
| 7 | Obsidian | 28% | 4.3 | 3% | 25% |
| 8 | Todoist | 25% | 2.7 | 9% | 44% |
| 9 | Google Calendar | 23% | 4.7 | 0% | — |
| 10 | Microsoft OneNote | 23% | 5.1 | 16% | 26% |
| 11 | TickTick | 18% | 4.1 | 3% | 17% |
| 12 | Routine | 17% | 3.9 | 0% | — |
| 13 | Google Tasks | 17% | 5.0 | 0% | — |
| 14 | Structured | 15% | 5.4 | 0% | — |
| 15 | Streaks | 13% | 2.8 | 0% | — |
Apple Notes 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 productivity apps, Google Calendar leads attachment at 125 against Roam Research at 87, indexed on the category at 100.
Each whorl lights one ring per index threshold cleared. See the full productivity apps desire edition →
Before it answers, it goes looking for Apple Notes.
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 64 searches in productivity apps, Apple Notes is named in 18% 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 productivity apps.
The independent sources AI models cite when answering productivity apps questions — the places a brand needs to be seen, reviewed and ranked.
Todoist converts reads into citations. Things 3 doesn't.
When Claude or ChatGPT opens a brand's own pages while answering, does the page make the cited-sources list? Todoist converts 44% of reads; Things 3 just 8%. That gap is a content problem, not a visibility problem.
Full data table
| # | Brand | Visibility | Avg. position | Citation share | Read→cited |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Apple Notes | 58% | 3.3 | 19% | 40% |
| 2 | Apple Reminders | 52% | 4.1 | 0% | — |
| 3 | Google Keep | 48% | 3.8 | 4% | 17% |
| 4 | Notion | 40% | 5.0 | 1% | 100% |
| 5 | Microsoft To Do | 33% | 3.8 | 0% | — |
| 6 | Things 3 | 32% | 4.9 | 1% | 8% |
| 7 | Obsidian | 28% | 4.3 | 3% | 25% |
| 8 | Todoist | 25% | 2.7 | 9% | 44% |
| 9 | Google Calendar | 23% | 4.7 | 0% | — |
| 10 | Microsoft OneNote | 23% | 5.1 | 16% | 26% |
| 11 | TickTick | 18% | 4.1 | 3% | 17% |
| 12 | Routine | 17% | 3.9 | 0% | — |
| 13 | Google Tasks | 17% | 5.0 | 0% | — |
| 14 | Structured | 15% | 5.4 | 0% | — |
| 15 | Streaks | 13% | 2.8 | 0% | — |
Three models. Three different answers.
Ask about productivity apps and the brand you are shown depends on the assistant: Claude → Apple Reminders, Gemini → Notion, ChatGPT → Apple Notes. Their top-five lists share just 43% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple Reminders | 50% | 25% | 80% | 55pp |
| Things 3 | 10% | 50% | 35% | 40pp |
| Apple Notes | 45% | 50% | 80% | 35pp |
| Microsoft To Do | 15% | 40% | 45% | 30pp |
| Google Keep | 45% | 40% | 60% | 20pp |
| Notion | 30% | 50% | 40% | 20pp |
| Microsoft OneNote | 20% | 15% | 35% | 20pp |
| TickTick | 10% | 30% | 15% | 20pp |
| Google Tasks | 5% | 20% | 25% | 20pp |
| Structured | 25% | 10% | 10% | 15pp |
Comparisons carry productivity apps.
Every page AI opened while answering, classified by what kind of page it is. Comparisons supply the most citations; How-to guides convert best — 96% of the ones models opened were actually cited.
The data behind this chart
| Page type | Cited | Read but not cited | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comparisons | 61 | 3 | 95% |
| Listicles | 28 | 5 | 85% |
| pricing | 24 | 10 | 71% |
| Product pages | 23 | 14 | 62% |
| How-to guides | 22 | 1 | 96% |
| Community threads | 13 | 1 | 93% |
| Editorial | 11 | 20 | 35% |
| Documentation | 11 | 6 | 65% |
Structured data is what separates cited from ignored.
Of the productivity apps pages models actually opened, how much more often each feature's pages ended up in the cited sources. Structured data is worth 19 percentage points; cites its sources pages fare 36pp 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 | 204 | 78% | 81 | 59% | +19pp |
| Answer up front | 141 | 77% | 144 | 68% | +9pp |
| Comparison table | 116 | 76% | 169 | 70% | +5pp |
| Named author | 138 | 74% | 147 | 71% | +2pp |
| Updated this year | 128 | 66% | 157 | 78% | -13pp |
| Hard statistics | 55 | 62% | 230 | 75% | -13pp |
| Cites its sources | 25 | 40% | 260 | 76% | -36pp |
Morgen 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. Morgen is the widest gap: well-built pages that still aren't converting into citations.
| Brand | Readiness | Pages cited | Pages profiled |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morgen | 63 | 17% | 6 |
| ClickUp | 48 | 25% | 8 |
| Calendly | 46 | 14% | 7 |
| Any.do | 40 | 33% | 6 |
| Asana | 33 | 67% | 3 |
| Superhuman | 29 | 0% | 3 |
| Notesnook | 29 | 50% | 6 |
| Cal.com | 25 | 25% | 8 |
| Habitify | 23 | 17% | 6 |
| Apple Notes | 23 | 20% | 35 |
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 productivity apps 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 Thu, 03 Sep 2026 07:05:54 GMT.