Machine Relations Index

Machine Relations Index (MRI)

Name: Machine Relations Index
Published: 2026-05-10
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

A neutral public benchmark for how AI answer engines cite sources, built from observed root-domain citations across six engines. MRI reports citation rates by category and question type once minimum sample thresholds are met.

31,217 domains195,295 source events26,277 answer runs118/151 measurable segments validated

This release

Published October 16, 2026

The Machine Relations Index release mri_score_v2.1+2026-10-16+676547a595a3, published October 16, 2026, counts 31,217 cited source domains across 26,277 observed answer runs from 6 answer engines (2026-05-10 to 2026-10-16). Methodology mri_score_v2.1; 118 of 151 measurable segments publish a rate.

From the weekly Index Report of October 12, 2026, which compares release mri_score_v2.1+2026-10-12+7925b6c15feb with release mri_score_v2.0+2026-10-05+0a0c7e02957b. A change is the difference between two published cumulative rates, in percentage points; it records that a rate moved, not why. The two releases use different methodology versions (mri_score_v2.0 and mri_score_v2.1), so part of each change comes from the method.

Largest rises among graded domains: rework.com 0.29% (+0.14 pts); nhimg.org 0.52% (+0.12 pts); guideflow.com 1.37% (+0.11 pts)
Largest falls among graded domains: reddit.com 10.02% (-0.75 pts); youtube.com 7.32% (-0.30 pts); medium.com 3.94% (-0.23 pts)
Segments that crossed the evidence floor: Industrial / Best tools, Industrial / How buyers choose, Industrial / Is it worth it, Industrial / Problem-first research, Industrial / Top lists, Industrial / Comparisons, Local Services / Best tools, Local Services / How buyers choose, Local Services / Is it worth it, Local Services / Problem-first research, Local Services / Comparisons, Logistics & Freight / Problem-first research

Weekly Index Report, October 12, 2026 All weekly Index Reports Categories and leaderboards

Measurement window2026-05-10 to 2026-10-16

Published 2026-10-16 from the current dataset release covering 31,217 cited domains and 195,295 source events.

Sample threshold10/7

Rates publish after enough answer runs across distinct observation dates.

Segment coverage78.1%

118 of 151 measurable segments validated, 33 still collecting observations. A further 6 of the 157 segments in the full universe cannot accumulate evidence and are excluded from every rate.

Citation leaders

Top cited domains

Reddit#1 overall · Community and social platform100th percentile overall · 2,446 cited runs · 4 engines YouTube#2 overall · Search or media platform100th percentile overall · 1,854 cited runs · 6 engines LinkedIn#3 overall · Community and social platform100th percentile overall · 1,468 cited runs · 6 engines Forbes#1 of 1027 classified editorial publications · Editorial publication100th percentile overall · 1,038 cited runs · 6 engines Medium#5 overall · Community and social platform100th percentile overall · 952 cited runs · 6 engines TechRadar#2 of 1027 classified editorial publications · Editorial publication100th percentile overall · 748 cited runs · 6 engines Arxiv.org#7 overall · Academic and government source100th percentile overall · 697 cited runs · 6 engines G2#8 overall · Market and company database100th percentile overall · 650 cited runs · 6 engines

Source universe

Cited source index

Initial view shows the top 50 domains from 31,217 total.

Data through 2026-10-16

Row	Source	Class			Confidence
1	Redditreddit.com · #1 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	9.31%	2,446	Confidence A
2	YouTubeyoutube.com · #2 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Search or media platform	7.06%	1,854	Confidence A
3	LinkedInlinkedin.com · #3 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	5.59%	1,468	Confidence A
4	Forbesforbes.com · #1 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	3.95%	1,038	Confidence A
5	Mediummedium.com · #5 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	3.62%	952	Confidence A
6	TechRadartechradar.com · #2 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	2.85%	748	Confidence A
7	Arxiv.orgarxiv.org · #7 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Academic and government source	2.65%	697	Confidence A
8	G2g2.com · #8 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Market and company database	2.47%	650	Confidence A
9	NIHnih.gov · #9 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Academic and government source	2.39%	629	Confidence A
10	Gartner.comgartner.com · #10 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Analyst and consulting research	2.03%	534	Confidence A
11	Yahoo Newsyahoo.com · #3 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	2.03%	533	Confidence A
12	Healthlinehealthline.com · #4 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	1.73%	455	Confidence B
13	Microsoft.commicrosoft.com · #13 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.67%	439	Confidence A
14	NerdWalletnerdwallet.com · #5 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	1.51%	397	Confidence A
15	Amazon.comamazon.com · #15 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Other observed source	1.51%	396	Confidence A
16	Ibm.comibm.com · #16 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.38%	363	Confidence A
17	TechTargettechtarget.com · #6 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	1.36%	358	Confidence A
18	Guideflow.comguideflow.com · #18 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.34%	353	Confidence A
19	Substack.comsubstack.com · #19 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	1.16%	306	Confidence A
20	Dev.todev.to · #20 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	1.15%	303	Confidence A
21	Landbase.comlandbase.com · #21 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.15%	303	Confidence A
22	Paloaltonetworks.compaloaltonetworks.com · #22 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.15%	301	Confidence A
23	The New York Timesnytimes.com · #7 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	1.09%	286	Confidence B
24	Hubspot.comhubspot.com · #24 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	1.08%	283	Confidence B
25	Crunchbase.comcrunchbase.com · #25 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Market and company database	1.06%	279	Confidence B
26	Wikipediawikipedia.org · #26 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Academic and government source	1.04%	273	Confidence B
27	Facebook.comfacebook.com · #27 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	1.03%	271	Confidence B
28	Github.comgithub.com · #28 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Community and social platform	0.99%	259	Confidence B
29	Sentinelone.comsentinelone.com · #29 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.96%	251	Confidence B
30	CNBCcnbc.com · #8 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	0.92%	243	Confidence B
31	Alibaba.comalibaba.com · #31 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Other observed source	0.89%	235	Confidence B
32	Zapier.comzapier.com · #32 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.87%	228	Confidence B
33	People Managing Peoplepeoplemanagingpeople.com · #9 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	0.86%	227	Confidence B
34	PCMagpcmag.com · #10 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	0.86%	226	Confidence B
35	PR Newswireprnewswire.com · #35 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Wire and press-release distribution	0.85%	223	Confidence B
36	Erpresearch.comerpresearch.com · #36 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Market and company database	0.83%	219	Confidence B
37	Experian.comexperian.com · #37 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.83%	218	Confidence B
38	Rippling.comrippling.com · #38 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.83%	217	Confidence B
39	Stripe.comstripe.com · #39 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.81%	214	Confidence B
40	Tom's Guidetomsguide.com · #11 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	0.80%	211	Confidence B
41	Deloitte.comdeloitte.com · #41 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Analyst and consulting research	0.80%	210	Confidence B
42	Harvard.eduharvard.edu · #42 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Academic and government source	0.77%	202	Confidence B
43	Bankrate.combankrate.com · #43 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Other observed source	0.75%	198	Confidence B
44	Worldmetrics.orgworldmetrics.org · #44 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Analyst and consulting research	0.75%	197	Confidence B
45	Grandviewresearch.comgrandviewresearch.com · #45 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Market and company database	0.72%	189	Confidence B
46	Nvidia.comnvidia.com · #46 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.72%	189	Confidence B
47	Apple Newsapple.com · #47 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Other observed source	0.69%	182	Confidence B
48	Databricks.comdatabricks.com · #48 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.69%	181	Confidence B
49	Monday.commonday.com · #49 of 31,217 observed domains · source site	Vendor-owned source	0.69%	181	Confidence B
50	WebMDwebmd.com · #12 of 1027 classified editorial publications · source site	Editorial publication	0.69%	181	Confidence B

Categories and question-shape leaderboards

25 categories and 151 question-shape leaderboards in release mri_score_v2.1+2026-10-16+676547a595a3. Each leaderboard ranks sources on its own observed runs; a collecting segment publishes no rate until it clears the evidence floor.

AI InfrastructureBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
AI Security & PrivacyBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
AI Visibility & GEOBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Consumer FinanceBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Consumer HealthBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Consumer ProductsBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
CybersecurityBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · News-driven citations · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Deep Tech & HardwareBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Education & TrainingBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Emergent ProsumerBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Enterprise SoftwareBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · News-driven citations · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Family SoftwareBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
FintechBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · News-driven citations · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Healthcare ServicesBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · News-driven citations · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
HR & TalentBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · News-driven citations · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
iGaming & BettingBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
IndustrialBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Legacy News TopicsNews-driven citations
Local ServicesBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it · Problem-first research · Top lists · Comparisons
Logistics & FreightBest tools · How buyers choose · Is it worth it (collecting) · Problem-first research · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)
Martech & AdvertisingBest tools (collecting) · How buyers choose (collecting) · Is it worth it (collecting) · News-driven citations · Problem-first research (collecting) · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)
Physical Consumer ProductsBest tools (collecting) · How buyers choose (collecting) · Is it worth it (collecting) · Problem-first research (collecting) · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)
Professional ServicesBest tools (collecting) · How buyers choose (collecting) · Is it worth it (collecting) · Problem-first research (collecting) · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)
Sales, GTM & CRMBest tools (collecting) · How buyers choose (collecting) · Is it worth it (collecting) · Problem-first research (collecting) · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)
VC & Private EquityBest tools (collecting) · How buyers choose (collecting) · Is it worth it (collecting) · Problem-first research (collecting) · Top lists (collecting) · Comparisons (collecting)

Agent access

Use this data in your agent

Every figure on this index can be read by machines. The MCP endpoint and the REST API return the same domain, category and segment records you see here. Each record carries its release identifier, window and denominators, and segment records also carry the evidence floor, so an agent can cite the exact number and when it was measured. The data is published under CC BY 4.0.

Read a segment rank as a statement about the questions behind it, not about a whole market. Some segments rest on only a few questions, and published rates still include runs where the question names the domain's own brand. Pulling from the API reproduces the published numbers; it does not re-run the measurement.

Read the returned questionContext, questionSet and naming fields before interpreting a rank. Missing or null context means unavailable for that release, never zero. When present, read questionContext.readAs and limitations, including namesReviewedCoverage and sourceRoleBasis; a rank describes the sampled questions, not an entire market.

MCP endpoint: https://machinerelations.ai/mcp

The Machine Relations Index measures how often AI answer engines cite each source domain when people ask real buying and research questions. It observes six engines — Perplexity, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Mode, and Google AI Overviews — across a fixed basket of 24 measured subject categories plus a legacy news-topic bucket (25 taxonomy nodes in all). Findings are grouped into strata, where a stratum is one subject category paired with one question type. A stratum publishes a citation rate only after it clears the evidence floor of at least 10 observed runs across at least 7 distinct dates; below that line it is marked collecting rather than scored, so early or thin signal is never shown as settled. An engine-day is left out of the denominator when its runs cannot reach the numerator. History collected before per-engine-day collection health was recorded is excluded when that engine was asked at least five times and returned no eligible citation; each such day is marked with that backfill rule. From the day collection health is stamped at collection, a day is excluded only when that stamp says the engine was silent or dark. Quiet days and days whose health was not measured stay in the denominator. Every excluded engine-day is listed, with its run count and the rule that excluded it, in the denominator_exclusion block of each release. Every domain an engine cites is measured on equal terms — membership in any external catalog is recorded only as a label and is never used to decide what gets scored. The public Index reports rates and rankings; it excludes raw cited URLs, internal query identifiers, and provider payloads. Validated source segments currently cover 78.1% of the measurable benchmark, which is the 151 segments that can accumulate evidence out of 157 in the full stratum universe.

Release mri_score_v2.1+2026-10-16+676547a595a3. Degraded coverage: 5 of 6 answer engines are currently returning answers. gemini quiet (5 of 104 collected calls returned an answer, 5%). Coverage across the window is uneven: gemini answered on 131 of 153 observed days (2,100 of 6,024 returned runs produced a citation); google_ai_mode answered on 111 of 153 observed days (1,476 of 1,891 returned runs produced a citation); google_ai_overviews answered on 94 of 153 observed days (869 of 1,328 returned runs produced a citation). Engines below 90% of the window are named here; per-engine day and run counts for all 6 are in engine_roster.