Meeting management software: AI search visibility ranking (2026)
How AI search engines rank meeting management software 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. Meeting management software used to prepare agendas, capture notes, assign action items, run structured check-ins, and improve team meeting productivity and accountability. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Refreshed Jul 01, 2026Download this ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
When AI engines like ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity answer questions about meeting management software, Range comes up most often, appearing in 12.5% of tracked responses across the 20 brands ranked here. Fireflies.ai and Otter follow as the next most frequently mentioned, with AI engines reaching for these names when buyers ask for recommendations, comparisons, or feature breakdowns.
The sources AI engines pull from most heavily include g2.com and zapier.com, both aggregator and review platforms, alongside youtube.com and worldmetrics.org. This means brands with strong review volume on G2 and clear how-to coverage on Zapier or YouTube tend to surface more often. It is not purely about product quality; it is about where third-party validation has accumulated in formats AI engines can read and cite.
For a buyer using this page, the practical takeaway is to cross-check any brand's AI visibility against its recency of reviews on G2 and its presence in tutorial or integration content. A brand that ranks high here likely has broad third-party coverage in this specific subcategory, which is a reasonable signal of market credibility, but a newer tool with thinner coverage may still outperform for your specific use case.
At a glance
What we observed in this categoryauto-generated
Range leads the meeting management software category with a composite score of 8.8 and 12.5% visibility, while the category average visibility sits at just 0.6%. That gap is significant: Range is the only brand generating meaningful visibility in AI responses, having jumped from rank 16 to rank 1 with a visibility delta of 12.5 points. The remaining 19 brands either show zero visibility or near-zero composite scores, meaning the category is effectively a one-brand AI presence story at this moment.
A clear divergence exists between being named and being cited. Fireflies.ai and Otter each hold 12.5% citation rates but record 0.0% visibility, giving them citation parity with the category leader on that single metric while scoring just 3.8 composite versus Range's 8.8. Range is the inverse case, with 12.5% visibility but zero citations. This suggests AI responses mention Range in narrative descriptions but pull source links from Fireflies.ai and Otter instead.
Google AI Mode is the sole engine recorded across all 20 brands in this audit, so no cross-engine comparison is possible. The top cited sources include youtube.com, g2.com, zapier.com, and guideflow.com, indicating the AI anchors on third-party review and tutorial content rather than brand-owned domains. Fellow.ai appears in the cited sources list despite fellow.app (the brand) recording zero citation share, suggesting a domain distinction the AI treats separately.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
Range 0% → 12% · rank #16 → #1+12pp
Biggest visibility fallers
-
Fellow 25% → 0% · rank #1 → #5-25pp
-
Leapsome 12% → 0% · rank #2 → #6-12pp
The ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
range.co
|
12% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Range leads with 12.5% visibility and a composite score of 8.8, having risen 15 rank positions, yet records zero citations despite dominating AI narrative mentions. |
||||
| 2 |
fireflies.ai
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Fireflies.ai holds 12.5% citation share with zero visibility, placing it equal to Otter on citations but below Range's composite score of 8.8 versus its own 3.8. |
||||
| 3 |
otter.ai
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Otter mirrors Fireflies.ai exactly, with 12.5% citation and 0.0% visibility, sharing rank 3 and an identical composite score of 3.8 against the category average visibility of 0.6%. |
||||
| 4 |
avoma.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Avoma scores 0.0 across visibility, citation, and composite, placing it among 15 brands with no measurable AI presence in Google AI Mode this audit period. |
||||
| 5 |
fellow.app
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Fellow fell from rank 1 to rank 5 with a visibility delta of -25.0 points, losing its entire previous 25.0% visibility share and now recording zero on all metrics. |
||||
| 6 |
leapsome.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
boardable.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
tactiq.io
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
clickup.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
hugo.team
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
docket.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
hypercontext.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
meetingking.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
lucidmeetings.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
laxis.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
read.ai
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
soapboxhq.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
notion.so
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
miro.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
asana.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on meeting management software, 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. More on visibility →
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. More on citation rate →
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. How AI engines pick sources →
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. How AI search ranking works →
Get your own meeting management software 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 meeting management software AI visibility
Who leads AI visibility in meeting management software?
Range leads with 12.5% visibility and a composite score of 8.8, the only brand with meaningful AI narrative presence. It rose from rank 16 to rank 1 in the most recent period.
Which brands are most cited by AI in this category?
Fireflies.ai and Otter each hold 12.5% citation share, matching each other exactly but recording zero visibility, meaning they appear as sources rather than named brands in AI responses.
What sources does Google AI Mode anchor on for meeting management software queries?
The top cited sources include youtube.com, g2.com, zapier.com, and guideflow.com, suggesting the AI draws primarily from third-party review and tutorial content rather than brand-owned domains.
How volatile is AI visibility in this category?
Very volatile: Fellow lost 25.0 percentage points of visibility between periods, dropping from rank 1 to rank 5, while Range gained 12.5 points and climbed 15 positions in the same window.
Is there a meaningful difference between AI visibility and AI citation share in this category?
Yes. Range has 12.5% visibility but zero citations, while Fireflies.ai and Otter each have 12.5% citations but zero visibility, showing the two metrics capture different types of AI presence.
How competitive is this category for AI presence overall?
It is heavily concentrated, with a category average visibility of just 0.6% and 17 of the top 20 brands recording zero composite scores in the current audit period.