Graph databases: AI search visibility ranking (2026)
How AI search engines rank graph databases 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. Graph databases used to model connected data, run relationship-heavy queries, and support recommendation, fraud, knowledge graph, and network analysis use cases. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Refreshed Jun 19, 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
Neo4j dominates the graph databases category with a visibility score of 75.0%, against a category average of just 5.0%. That 70-percentage-point gap between Neo4j and the average is the widest concentration seen in a 20-brand field, meaning Google AI Mode effectively treats this category as a single-brand conversation. ArangoDB sits second at 25.0%, but every other brand in the top 10, including TigerGraph, Azure Cosmos DB, and Amazon Neptune, registers 0.0% visibility.
A critical divergence in this category is that visibility does not translate into citation for any brand. Neo4j holds 75.0% visibility but a 0.0% citation rate, matching every other brand in the dataset. The category average citation rate is also 0.0%. This means Google AI Mode names Neo4j frequently in responses but does not link back to neo4j.com as a source, making it a named but not a trusted-source brand in citation terms.
The sources Google AI Mode does cite in this category are largely third-party and community platforms. The top cited domains include youtube.com, reddit.com, db-engines.com, cambridge-intelligence.com, puppygraph.com, arcadedb.com, falkordb.com, and milvus.io. None of these are the primary domains of the top-ranked brands. This pattern suggests the AI anchors its sourcing on comparison sites, community discussion, and niche vendor content rather than the vendor sites it mentions by name.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
Neo4j 62% → 75% · rank #1 → #1+12pp
Biggest visibility fallers
-
TigerGraph 38% → 0% · rank #2 → #4-38pp
-
Amazon Neptune 25% → 0% · rank #3 → #6-25pp
-
Azure Cosmos DB 12% → 0% · rank #5 → #3-12pp
The ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
neo4j.com
|
75% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Neo4j leads at 75.0% visibility, 15 times the category average of 5.0%, yet holds a 0.0% citation rate, identical to every other brand in the dataset. |
||||
| 2 |
arangodb.com
|
25% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
ArangoDB is the only other brand with any measurable visibility at 25.0%, placing it a distant second but still five times above the 5.0% category average. |
||||
| 3 |
azure.microsoft.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Azure Cosmos DB records 0.0% visibility despite ranking third, having dropped 12.5 visibility points from the previous period while gaining two rank positions due to peers falling further. |
||||
| 4 |
tigergraph.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
TigerGraph is the biggest faller in the category, losing 37.5 visibility points to reach 0.0% and dropping two rank positions from second to fourth. |
||||
| 5 |
dgraph.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Dgraph sits at rank 5 with 0.0% visibility and 0.0% citation rate, indistinguishable from the five brands ranked immediately below it on both metrics. |
||||
| 6 |
aws.amazon.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
vespa.ai
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
redis.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
memgraph.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
graphwise.ai
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
janusgraph.org
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
stardog.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
ontotext.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
terminusdb.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
datastax.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
oracle.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
franz.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
marklogic.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
kuzudb.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
surrealdb.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on graph databases, 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 graph databases 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 graph databases AI visibility
Who leads AI visibility in graph databases?
Neo4j leads with 75.0% visibility in Google AI Mode, far ahead of second-placed ArangoDB at 25.0% and every other brand at 0.0%. The category average is just 5.0%, reflecting how concentrated visibility is around a single brand.
Which graph database brands have lost the most AI visibility recently?
TigerGraph lost 37.5 visibility points to reach 0.0%, falling from rank 2 to rank 4. Amazon Neptune lost 25.0 points, also reaching 0.0%, and dropped from rank 3 to rank 6.
Do any graph database brands get cited as sources in Google AI Mode responses?
No brand in the dataset holds a non-zero citation rate, including Neo4j at 75.0% visibility. The category average citation rate is 0.0% across all 20 brands.
What sources does Google AI Mode cite most for graph database research?
The top cited sources are youtube.com, puppygraph.com, reddit.com, cambridge-intelligence.com, and db-engines.com. None of these are the primary domains of the leading brands such as neo4j.com or arangodb.com.
Is high AI visibility in graph databases the same as being a cited source?
Not in this category. Neo4j is named in 75.0% of relevant AI responses but has a 0.0% citation rate, showing that Google AI Mode mentions brands and cites sources from entirely different pools.
How concentrated is AI visibility across the graph databases category?
Extremely concentrated. Only two of 20 brands have any visibility at all, with Neo4j at 75.0% and ArangoDB at 25.0%, while the remaining 18 brands including major vendors like Amazon Neptune and Redis all sit at 0.0%.