Google and ChatGPT Rarely Recommend the Same Brands in AI Search

Inconsistent AI Search Results

BrightEdge, a leading SEO platform, recently published a detailed study comparing how today’s most used AI tools handle brand recommendations. The company examined tens of thousands of identical prompts across Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, and ChatGPT. This comes right after the news that ChatGPT is in fact using Google search to answer chat questions.

In nearly 62% of cases, the three platforms returned different sets of brand recommendations. Only a small portion of prompts, just 17%, produced consistent brand mentions across all tools.

This level of inconsistency reveals a major blind spot for legal marketers. Many assume their content performs similarly across different AI platforms. This new data shows that is not the case. What appears on one tool may be entirely missing from another. That gap raises real questions about how firms are evaluating performance and whether their content is reaching people actively searching for legal help.

Google Names 3X More Brands Than ChatGPT

BrightEdge’s study uncovered a wide gap in how often each platform mentions brands. Google AI Overviews stood out by including brand names in more than 36% of prompts. In comparison, ChatGPT named brands in just under 4% of cases. Google AI Mode was even lower.

The actual number of brand mentions per query also differed significantly. Google Overviews averaged more than six brand mentions per query. ChatGPT included just over two. Google AI Mode came in last with fewer than two per query.

Overall, Google’s AI Overviews appear far more likely to surface multiple brands in a single response.

Different Platforms, Different Citations

The study found sharp differences in how each AI tool handles citations. Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode both leaned heavily on linking out to external sources. In many cases, they cited more sources than the number of brands they mentioned.

Google AI Overviews averaged more than fourteen citations per query but only included about six brand mentions. Google AI Mode followed a similar pattern with nearly ten citations per prompt and fewer than two brand mentions.

ChatGPT showed the opposite behavior. It mentioned more brands than citations, with most responses offering no source attribution at all. The numbers show two brand mentions but fewer than one citation on average per query.

Google’s AI products appear to rely more heavily on crawlable content and visible authority signals. ChatGPT continues to operate more from its training than from fresh, discoverable material.

When AI Platforms Align

While the overall brand disagreement between AI tools was high, BrightEdge’s study identified specific types of searches where the platforms were more likely to return the same brands.

The highest level of brand agreement came from comparison-based prompts. In these cases, brand alignment across platforms reached 80%. Queries involving a clear purchase-intent followed closely, with 62% showing consistency across tools. Searches asking where to find something had just 38% alignment, while open-ended prompts using the word “best” resulted in only 23% agreement.

This variation highlights how much query intent influences what a user sees. For law firms working to improve their position in AI-generated answers, it is no longer enough to focus on keywords alone. How a query is framed affects which brands are shown, and how often.

By understanding the types of questions potential clients are asking, firms can create more targeted content that responds directly to those patterns. That approach can increase the chances of being included in responses across several AI tools.

How Law Firms Can Increase Visibility Across AI Search Tools

Only 17% of prompts in this study returned the same brand recommendations across all three platforms. That means most brands are either inconsistently represented or missing entirely. This creates an opportunity for law firms that many competitors are not acting on… yet.

Firms that take the time to build clear, well-structured content backed by trustworthy sources are more likely to appear in Google’s AI results. Meanwhile, firms that focus on creating detailed, helpful answers to real client questions may be better positioned to show up in ChatGPT’s responses. Since each platform pulls information differently, covering both angles matters.

TSEG works with law firms to identify where their content is underperforming in AI search and helps them build a strategy that speaks to the way these tools collect and present information. From site structure to content development, we bring a research-based approach that increases visibility where others are being left out. Reach out today to learn more.