Measurement

Brand sentiment without the vanity score

A score like “82% positive” feels good and tells you little. What AI assistants actually say about your brand, the facts they get wrong and the doubts they repeat, is where the useful work is.

Most AI visibility tools classify how assistants describe your brand: positive, neutral, negative, sometimes mixed. Averaged up, that becomes a sentiment score. It is a reasonable alarm bell. It is a poor guide to what to do next.

How tools sort descriptions

ToolCategories or measure
ScrunchPositive, Mixed, Negative, Missing (when tone can’t be determined)
OtterlyAIThe balance between positive and negative references
Semrush AI VisibilityOverall sentiment: the balance of positive and general sentiment in mentions
Peec AIPositive, neutral or negative descriptions
Summarised from each provider’s documentation, viewed 11 November 2026.

Note the small differences. Some tools have a “mixed” bucket for answers that praise one thing and criticise another; others force a single label. Some count answers where tone is unclear; others leave them out. As with every metric in this category, a sentiment percentage from one tool isn’t directly comparable with another’s.

Why the score flatters

An answer that recommends a brand will, almost by definition, describe it in neutral or positive terms. So a brand that is recommended often can show healthy sentiment even when something important in those answers is wrong. The useful signal is usually in the detail, not the average.

What the score shows

  • The overall tone of mentions
  • Big shifts after bad news
  • Tone versus rivals, roughly

What it hides

  • Wrong facts stated politely
  • Old prices, features or names
  • The one doubt repeated in every answer

Read for four things instead

AccuracyAre prices, features, locations and names correct? Outdated facts are common and fixable.
PositioningWhat are you “best for”? Is that the job you want to be chosen for?
ObjectionsThe caveat that keeps appearing: “but setup is complex”, “but it’s expensive”.
ComparisonsWho you are compared with, and on what.

A spreadsheet with those four columns, filled from a dozen real answers, is often more useful than a year of sentiment charts. Some tools now help directly: Waikay, for instance, lists fact checking and topic analysis, and says it uncovers hallucinations and missing knowledge.

TakeawayUse the sentiment score to spot changes. Use the answer text to decide what to fix. The most valuable finding is often a polite sentence that is simply wrong.

From description to action

  1. CollectTen to twenty answers that mention you, from the platforms that matter.
  2. TagAccuracy errors, positioning, objections, comparisons.
  3. TraceCheck the cited pages for where each claim comes from.
  4. Fix the sourceUpdate your pages, correct listings, answer the objection publicly.

Step three links sentiment to citations: wrong facts usually come from somewhere, and the cited page is the first place to look.

Sources

  1. Scrunch: Metrics guide viewed 11 Nov 2026
  2. OtterlyAI: Brand report KPI definitions viewed 11 Nov 2026
  3. Semrush: AI SEO metrics viewed 11 Nov 2026
  4. Peec AI documentation: brand metrics viewed 11 Nov 2026
  5. Waikay viewed 11 Nov 2026

Directory figures come from Hyperfind’s profiles of 34 tools, not the whole market. Prices follow each provider’s published offer on the date shown in its profile.

Tools in this story

Price your workload ↗Compare tools ↗

Keep reading

Measurement

What an AI visibility tool actually measures

Strip away the dashboards and every tool is counting the same few things in an AI answer. Here is the anatomy, and the questions to ask about each number.

ChartWorked example
Measurement

Citations: the pages behind the answer

A mention tells you an assistant named you. A citation tells you which page convinced it. For most teams, the citation list is the most actionable thing an AI visibility tool produces.

Measurement

Share of voice: one phrase, three different sums

Two tools can show the same brands with opposite winners, and both be right. A four-prompt worked example shows how coverage, mention share and search-weighted share of voice can rank rivals in reverse.

ChartDecision treeWorked example