monitoraeo
AI Visibility Rankings · Real Estate

Top 20 self-storage facilities in raleigh by AI search visibility (2026)

Self-storage operators serving Raleigh households, movers, students, and local businesses with secure units, climate control, and short- and long-term storage options. Ranked by a composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →

Refreshed Jun 08, 2026
8%
Avg visibility across category
12%
Avg citation rate
20/20
Brands successfully audited

At a glance

Category leader Public Storage 62% visibility · named in 5 of 8 AI answers
Most cited brand Public Storage 88% citation rate · the AI's most-trusted source brand in self-storage facilities in raleigh
Top cited domain google.com Referenced by AI across the self-storage facilities in raleigh query set — the highest-leverage PR target in this category
Visibility spread 62pp Gap between top and bottom of the ranking · 16 brands at 0% (invisible to the AI)

What we observed in this categoryauto-generated

Public Storage leads the Raleigh self-storage AI visibility landscape with a 62.5% visibility score and a composite score of 70.0, followed by Extra Space Storage at 50.0% visibility and a composite of 61.2. The gap between these two and the rest of the field is stark: SmartStop sits at rank 3 with just 25.0%, and ranks 4 through 10 collectively average near zero visibility. With the category average visibility at only 7.5%, the top two brands are capturing the overwhelming share of AI-generated mentions, creating a two-brand dominance structure.

A notable divergence between visibility and citation emerges at ranks 4 and 5. Life Storage holds a 12.5% visibility score but a 0.0% citation rate, meaning the AI mentions it without sourcing it — named but not trusted. CubeSmart shows the inverse: 0.0% visibility but a 12.5% citation rate, indicating it appears as a source reference without earning direct mention in AI responses. This visibility-citation decoupling signals that being present in AI answers and being treated as an authoritative source are distinct outcomes in this category.

Google AI Mode is the top engine across all 20 ranked brands without exception, and the top cited sources list anchors heavily on first-party brand domains — publicstorage.com and extraspace.com both appear — alongside aggregator and local sources including sparefoot.com, m.yelp.com, raleighrealty.com, storva.com, and amplestoragecenter.com. The presence of google.com itself at the top of cited sources suggests the AI is looping back through Google Business Profiles or Maps data as a primary reference layer for this local-intent category.

Movers & shakers since last refresh

Biggest visibility risers

  • Public Storage 0% → 62% · rank #0 → #1
    +62pp
  • Extra Space Storage 0% → 50% · rank #0 → #2
    +50pp
  • SmartStop Self Storage 0% → 25% · rank #0 → #3
    +25pp

The ranking

# Brand Visibility Citation Top engine
1
publicstorage.com
62% 88% Google AI Mode

Public Storage leads all 20 brands with a 62.5% visibility and 87.5% citation rate, more than 8x the category average visibility of 7.5%.

2
extraspace.com
50% 88% Google AI Mode

Extra Space Storage matches Public Storage's 87.5% citation rate despite trailing in visibility by 12.5 points, suggesting near-equal source authority with lower narrative presence.

3
smartstopselfstorage.com
25% 25% Google AI Mode

SmartStop's visibility and citation rates are identical at 25.0%, placing it in a distant third with a composite score exactly half of Extra Space Storage's 61.2.

4
lifestorage.com
12% 0% Google AI Mode

Life Storage achieves 12.5% visibility but a 0.0% citation rate, making it the clearest example in this dataset of an AI-named brand that receives zero source attribution.

5
cubesmart.com
0% 12% Google AI Mode

CubeSmart's 0.0% visibility against a 12.5% citation rate inverts Life Storage's pattern, appearing as a cited source without earning any direct mention in AI-generated responses.

6
uhaul.com
0% 12% Google AI Mode
7
nsastorage.com
0% 12% Google AI Mode
8
istorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
9
storagemart.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
10
securespace.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
11
go-store-it.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
12
compassselfstorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
13
metroselfstorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
14
storagekingusa.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
15
morningstarstorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
16
moveitstorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
17
recnationstorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
18
simplyss.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
19
aaaakeyministorage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode
20
lockaway-storage.com
0% 0% Google AI Mode

Sources AI engines trust in this category

Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on self-storage facilities in raleigh, 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.

google.comextraspace.compublicstorage.comraleighrealty.comm.yelp.comamplestoragecenter.comsparefoot.comstorva.com

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 self-storage facilities in raleigh 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.

Audit your self-storage facilities in raleigh brand → Browse all rankings Methodology →

Frequently asked about self-storage facilities in raleigh AI visibility

Who leads AI visibility in Raleigh self-storage facilities?

Public Storage leads with a 62.5% visibility score and 87.5% citation rate, giving it a composite score of 70.0 — well ahead of second-ranked Extra Space Storage at 61.2.

How concentrated is AI visibility in this category?

Extremely concentrated: the category average visibility is just 7.5%, while Public Storage and Extra Space Storage alone score 62.5% and 50.0% respectively, and seven of the top ten brands score 0.0% visibility.

What sources does Google AI Mode cite most for Raleigh self-storage research?

The top cited sources include google.com, extraspace.com, publicstorage.com, raleighrealty.com, m.yelp.com, sparefoot.com, amplestoragecenter.com, and storva.com, indicating a mix of brand domains, local aggregators, and Google's own properties.

Can a brand be cited by AI without appearing in AI-generated answers?

Yes — CubeSmart has a 0.0% visibility score but a 12.5% citation rate, meaning Google AI Mode references its domain as a source without naming the brand in response narratives.

Which self-storage brands in Raleigh have zero AI presence entirely?

iStorage, StorageMart, and SecureSpace Self Storage all score 0.0% on both visibility and citation, giving them a composite score of 0.0 and no measurable footprint in Google AI Mode.

Is there a gap between AI naming a brand and AI trusting a brand as a source?

Yes — Life Storage is named in AI responses (12.5% visibility) but never cited as a source (0.0% citation), demonstrating that AI mention and AI-source attribution are distinct and not always correlated.