Converged.AI × BrandInsightAI
BrandInsightAI Insights
Drink · refreshed weekly

How AI wants soft drinks

Soft Drinks is decided on attraction: Coca-Cola indexes 116 there against Sprite at 92, a 24-point spread. Coca-Cola holds the strongest overall profile at 111 — complete desire. But the brand assistants name most often is Fanta, not the category's market leader: being desired and being named are not the same measurement. Across these 8 brands, attachment tracks being named most closely (rank correlation 0.36).

8 brands · 60 AI answers · 92 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)
Drink

Soft Drinksupset

#Brand AttractionAffinityAttachment Desire shapeNamed in
1 Coca-Cola: Attraction 116, Affinity 108, Attachment 108Coca-Cola 116 108 108 Complete desire 40%
2 San Pellegrino: Attraction 106, Affinity 108, Attachment 103San Pellegrino 106 108 103 Quietly trusted 10%
3 Perrier: Attraction 106, Affinity 104, Attachment 100Perrier 106 104 100 Magnetic but unbought 2%
4 Pepsi: Attraction 99, Affinity 97, Attachment 100Pepsi 99 97 100 Category default 35%
5 7 Up: Attraction 92, Affinity 98, Attachment 967 Up 92 98 96 Loved, not chosen 10%
6 Fanta: Attraction 95, Affinity 96, Attachment 100Fanta 95 96 100 Habit, not love 43%
7 Sprite: Attraction 92, Affinity 96, Attachment 100Sprite 92 96 100 Habit, not love 42%
8 Tango: Attraction 95, Affinity 94, Attachment 93Tango 95 94 93 Fading 8%

Indexed against the soft drinks average of 8 brands (100 = the category), 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.

Attraction

24-point spread · tracks being named -0.22
Coca-Cola116
Sprite92

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

Attachment

15-point spread · tracks being named 0.36
Coca-Cola108
Tango93

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

Affinity

14-point spread · tracks being named -0.19
Coca-Cola108
Tango94

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

The shapes AI leaves these brands in

Three indices make a profile, and profiles fall into recognisable shapes. A brand that is magnetic but unbought has a different problem from a habit nobody loves — and a different thing to build next.

Coca-Cola: Attraction 116, Affinity 108, Attachment 108
Complete desire
Wanted, belonged-to and repurchased — the rare full spiral.
Coca-Cola
Nothing obviously missing.
Perrier: Attraction 106, Affinity 104, Attachment 100
Magnetic but unbought
AI admires it and forgets to recommend buying it again.
Perrier
Build next: attachment
Fanta: Attraction 95, Affinity 96, Attachment 100
Habit, not love
Recommended for reliability and ease; nobody calls it exciting.
Fanta · Sprite
Build next: attraction
San Pellegrino: Attraction 106, Affinity 108, Attachment 103
Quietly trusted
Legitimacy carries it; it is rarely named first.
San Pellegrino
Build next: attraction
7 Up: Attraction 92, Affinity 98, Attachment 96
Loved, not chosen
Identity and values without superiority or habit.
7 Up
Build next: attachment
Pepsi: Attraction 99, Affinity 97, Attachment 100
Category default
Parity on all three: the safe answer, never the interesting one.
Pepsi
Build next: attraction
Tango: Attraction 95, Affinity 94, Attachment 93
Fading
Below the benchmark everywhere; the answer has moved on.
Tango
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
Range & Availability Attachment 7.8 Coca-Cola 9.3 2.3
Differentiation vs Sameness Attraction 6.8 Coca-Cola 8.0 2.0
Heritage & Authority Affinity 7.9 Coca-Cola 9.0 2.0
Reliability & Consistency Attachment 7.8 Coca-Cola 9.0 2.0
Trust & Credibility Affinity 7.9 Coca-Cola 9.0 2.0

Where everyone reads alike

DimensionDriverCategory avgStrongestSpread
Sustainability & Ethics Affinity 6.0 Coca-Cola 6.0 0.0
Delivery & Fulfilment Attachment 7.0 Coca-Cola 7.0 0.0
Value & Pricing Attachment 7.0 Pepsi 7.3 0.3
Ease of Use & Onboarding Attachment 7.5 Coca-Cola 8.0 1.0
Style & Aesthetic Attraction 7.3 Coca-Cola 8.0 1.5

Does desire track being recommended?

Rank correlation between a brand's driver index and the share of answers naming it, across the 8 indexed brands in this category. A relationship inside one run's answers — descriptive, never causal, and easily moved by a single brand at this sample size.

Attraction-0.22
Affinity-0.19
Attachment0.36

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 of every scored brand in its category — 100 is the category, 115 is fifteen per cent above it.

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.