Converged.AI × BrandInsightAI
BrandInsightAI Insights
Technology · refreshed weekly

How AI wants smartphones

Smartphones is decided on affinity: Google indexes 115 there against Xiaomi at 55, a 60-point spread. Attraction separates almost nobody (21 points across the whole category), so being described that way is table stakes here rather than an advantage. Google holds the strongest overall profile, indexing 111 against the category average: ahead on all three. But the brand assistants name most often is Samsung, not the category's market leader: being desired and being named are not the same measurement.

4 brands · 60 AI answers · 47 dimension scores · measured, never estimated

Attraction Standing out in the answer: named first, described as superior, magnetic and influential.
Affinity Belonging in the answer: tied to identity, values and legitimacy, not just specifications.
Attachment Staying in the answer: recommended again, dependable, easy, part of the routine.
AttractionAffinityAttachment Each whorl lights one ring per index threshold cleared (90 / 96 / 102 / 108 / 115)

100 = the average brand in the same category.100 = the average brand across every category in the index.

Technology

Smartphonesupset

#Brand AttractionAffinityAttachment SummaryNamed in
1 Google: Attraction 109, Affinity 115, Attachment 114Google: Attraction 123, Affinity 116, Attachment 102Google 109123 115116 114102 Ahead on all threeNoticed, not returned to 57%
2 Samsung: Attraction 103, Affinity 115, Attachment 114Samsung: Attraction 116, Affinity 116, Attachment 102Samsung 103116 115116 114102 Credible, not first choiceNoticed, not returned to 60%
3 Apple: Attraction 99, Affinity 114, Attachment 114Apple: Attraction 112, Affinity 114, Attachment 102Apple 99112 114114 114102 Credible, not first choiceCredible, not first choice 48%
4 Xiaomi: Attraction 88, Affinity 55, Attachment 57Xiaomi: Attraction 99, Affinity 55, Attachment 51Xiaomi 8899 5555 5751 Behind on all threeNoticed, not returned to 17%

Indexed against the average of the 4 indexed smartphones brands, so 100 is the category average and a brand is read against the rivals it actually competes with.Indexed against the average of every indexed brand in the whole index — 1,605 brands across 61 categories — so 100 is the average brand anywhere here and a number reads the same on every board. 4 smartphones brands, measured across 60 AI answers in the latest weekly run.

Driver by driver

Where the category actually separates. A wide spread means assistants describe these brands very differently on that driver; a narrow one means it is table stakes.

Affinity

60-point spread
Google115
Xiaomi55

The widest field of the three: this is where the category separates.

Attachment

57-point spread
Google114
Xiaomi57

Real separation, but not the category’s defining contest.

Attraction

21-point spread
Google109
Xiaomi88

The tightest of the three: most brands land close together here.

Where each brand stands

Each brand's three indices, summed up in a line: which drivers it is ahead on, which it is behind on, and the one to build next. A brand that is noticed but not returned to has a different problem from one that is relied on but not exciting.

Google: Attraction 109, Affinity 115, Attachment 114
Ahead on all three
Above average on attraction, affinity and attachment.
Google
No driver is behind; protect the lead.
Samsung: Attraction 103, Affinity 115, Attachment 114
Credible, not first choice
Affinity (identity, values, legitimacy) is its strongest driver.
Samsung · Apple
Build next: attraction
Xiaomi: Attraction 88, Affinity 55, Attachment 57
Behind on all three
Below average on attraction, affinity and attachment.
Xiaomi
Build next: attraction
Google: Attraction 123, Affinity 116, Attachment 102
Noticed, not returned to
Attraction is its strongest driver; attachment trails behind it.
Google · Samsung · Xiaomi
Build next: attachment
Apple: Attraction 112, Affinity 114, Attachment 102
Credible, not first choice
Affinity (identity, values, legitimacy) is its strongest driver.
Apple
Build next: attraction

What assistants actually talk about

The sixteen dimensions underneath the drivers, scored 0–10 on how the answers describe each brand. Spread is the distance between the strongest and weakest brand: the widest are where a brand can still separate itself, the narrowest are the price of entry.

Where brands separate

DimensionDriverCategory avgStrongestSpread
Reliability & Consistency Affinity 7.6 Apple 9.0 5.0
Range & Availability Attachment 6.8 Samsung 9.0 5.0
Ease of Use & Onboarding Attachment 6.8 Google 8.7 4.7
Value & Pricing Attraction 6.3 Google 9.0 4.3
Trust & Credibility Affinity 7.0 Apple 8.0 4.0

Where everyone reads alike

DimensionDriverCategory avgStrongestSpread
Heritage & Authority Attraction 8.0 Apple 8.0 0.0
Leadership & Momentum Attraction 9.0 Apple 9.0 0.0
Differentiation vs Sameness Attraction 8.0 Samsung 8.7 1.0
Quality & Performance Attraction 8.8 Apple 9.3 1.0
Innovation & Technology Attraction 8.6 Samsung 9.3 1.3

Method & limitations

Every week, each category runs a fixed set of unbranded consumer prompts against ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini. A separate model reads the answers and scores every brand named in them across 16 perception dimensions, 0–10. Those dimensions are grouped into the three Drivers of Desire from the Havas Science of Desire framework, and each brand's driver score is indexed against the average brand in its own category — 100 is the category average, 115 is fifteen per cent above it. The Vs all categories switch re-indexes the same scores against the average of every indexed brand across every category, so boards can be read against each other; the ranking inside a category is the same either way. Each category's own average, indexed against the whole index, is its place in the category table. The summary beside each brand describes where it stands on the three drivers against whichever benchmark is showing: above 104 counts as ahead, below 96 as behind.

This measures how AI assistants describe brands in their answers. It is not a survey of people, and it is not an endorsement: the scores are a reading of machine-generated text at the time of the run, and relationships between drivers and how often a brand is named are correlational. A brand needs at least six scored dimensions in a run to be indexed, and a category needs at least four such brands to get a board. See the full methodology.