Chaos engineering platforms: AI search visibility ranking (2026)
How AI search engines rank chaos engineering platforms by visibility and citations. 20 brands measured monthly across Google AI Mode: which brands the AI names in answers, which domains it cites as sources, and how the leaders compare. Chaos engineering platforms used to test resilience, inject controlled failures, and harden cloud-native systems before incidents happen. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Refreshed Jun 15, 2026Download this ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
At a glance
What we observed in this categoryauto-generated
Gremlin dominates this category with a visibility score of 62.5%, more than double the next closest brands and roughly eleven times the category average of 5.6%. That gap is significant because it means Google AI Mode defaults to Gremlin as the primary reference point in chaos engineering responses, leaving most other platforms effectively invisible. Only four brands register any measurable composite score at all, confirming that AI visibility in this category is extremely concentrated at the top.
The most striking divergence in this data is between Harness Chaos Engineering and LitmusChaos. Harness has zero visibility but a 50% citation rate, meaning AI responses link to harness.io as a source without naming Harness as a recommended platform. LitmusChaos sits at the opposite extreme, with 25% visibility but a 0% citation rate, named in responses but never cited as a reference. Steadybit shows the most balanced profile, with 25% visibility and a 50% citation rate, suggesting it is both named and trusted as a source.
Google AI Mode is the top engine for every brand in this dataset, indicating that the entire category's AI footprint is concentrated on one engine. The cited sources list reveals that YouTube, GitHub, Gartner, and Reddit all appear alongside brand domains, suggesting the AI is drawing on community and third-party content rather than relying solely on vendor sites. Harness.io and steadybit.com both appear as cited sources, reinforcing the pattern where source authority and brand visibility do not necessarily align.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
Gremlin 0% → 62% · rank #0 → #1+62pp
-
Steadybit 0% → 25% · rank #0 → #2+25pp
-
LitmusChaos 0% → 25% · rank #0 → #3+25pp
The ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
gremlin.com
|
62% | 38% | Google AI Mode |
Gremlin leads with 62.5% visibility and 37.5% citation, both figures far above the category averages of 5.6% and 7.5%, making it the clear default reference in AI responses. |
||||
| 2 |
steadybit.com
|
25% | 50% | Google AI Mode |
Steadybit achieves the highest citation rate of any brand at 50%, matching Harness despite having equal visibility to LitmusChaos, suggesting stronger trust signals in AI source selection. |
||||
| 3 |
litmuschaos.io
|
25% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
LitmusChaos matches Steadybit on visibility at 25% but holds a 0% citation rate, indicating it is mentioned in AI responses but its domain is not used as a supporting reference. |
||||
| 4 |
harness.io
|
0% | 50% | Google AI Mode |
Harness records 0% visibility yet a 50% citation rate, the sharpest named-versus-trusted gap in the dataset, meaning AI uses its content as a source while not recommending it as a platform. |
||||
| 5 |
aws.amazon.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
AWS Fault Injection Service has 0% visibility and only 12.5% citation, a notably weak result for a major cloud provider, giving it the lowest composite score among the top five at 3.8. |
||||
| 6 |
komodor.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
goshaker.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
up9.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
stormforge.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
getturbine.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
grafana.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
loadmill.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
azure.microsoft.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
cloud.google.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
chaos-mesh.org
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
powerfulseal.github.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
netflix.github.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
chaostoolkit.org
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
reliably.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
speedscale.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on chaos engineering platforms, these are the domains Google AI Mode cited most often. If you're not on this list — or if your competitors are — that's a concrete PR / linkbuilding target.
How to read this ranking
Four things worth knowing before you act on the numbers above. These are the same definitions across every industry page — for category-specific observations, see the What we observed section above (where available) and the per-brand insights inline in the ranking.
Visibility = being named
A brand's visibility % is the share of AI answers that mention it by name in the response prose. This is who AI engines actively recommend to the buyer.
Citation rate = being trusted
Citation rate is the share of AI answers that include the brand's domain as a clickable source link. This is what the AI treats as authoritative evidence — different from being named.
Top engine differs by brand
The "top engine" column shows which AI surface each brand performs best on. Big gaps between a brand's score across engines usually points to specific content or schema gaps.
Rankings move month to month
AI engines re-crawl and re-rank on shorter cycles than classical search. We re-audit every brand on this list at least every 30 days and refresh this page automatically.
Get your own chaos engineering platforms brand audited
The brands above were curated from public market-leader lists. Want the same measurement against your own brand — including the queries you appear on, which competitors get named instead, and a prioritised fix list? Run a free preview.
Frequently asked about chaos engineering platforms AI visibility
Who leads AI visibility in the chaos engineering platforms category?
Gremlin leads with a visibility score of 62.5% and a composite score of 55.0, more than double the next ranked brands and far above the category average of 5.6%.
Which chaos engineering brand is most cited as a source by Google AI Mode?
Both Steadybit and Harness Chaos Engineering share the highest citation rate at 50%, though Harness achieves this with zero visibility, meaning it is used as a reference source but not named as a recommended tool.
What sources does AI cite most for chaos engineering research?
The top cited sources include youtube.com, github.com, harness.io, gremlin.com, steadybit.com, gartner.com, reddit.com, and vcluster.com, showing a mix of vendor sites, community platforms, and analyst content.
How concentrated is AI visibility in the chaos engineering category?
Visibility is highly concentrated: only three brands score above zero on visibility, with Gremlin alone accounting for 62.5%, and 15 of the 20 brands in the category recording a composite score of zero.
Which engine drives AI visibility for chaos engineering platforms?
Google AI Mode is the top engine for every brand in the dataset, indicating the entire measurable AI footprint for this category sits on a single engine.
Is there a meaningful gap between which brands are named and which are trusted as sources?
Yes, LitmusChaos is named in AI responses with 25% visibility but has a 0% citation rate, while Harness has the reverse profile with 0% visibility but 50% citation, showing a clear split between brand mention and source authority.