AEO for warehouse execution systems: AI search visibility ranking
How AI search engines rank warehouse execution systems by visibility and citations. 20 brands measured quarterly across Google AI Mode: which brands the AI names in answers, which domains it cites as sources, and how the leaders compare. Warehouse execution systems used to coordinate labor, automation, tasks, and real-time fulfillment activity on the warehouse floor. Composite score: 70% visibility (% of AI answers naming the brand) + 30% citation rate (% citing the brand's domain). Full methodology →
Download this AEO ranking as a PDF
We'll email it to you. One-off send — no list, no follow-up, no surprise marketing.
When buyers ask AI engines about Warehouse execution systems, Fortna emerges as the leader. It holds a significant visibility percentage and is cited in 25.0% of responses. Other top contenders include Softeon and Manhattan Associates, solidifying their notable presence in the market.
The rankings are shaped by frequently cited sources like youtube.com and gartner.com. These platforms, often acting as aggregators or review sites, provide insights that heavily influence AI responses. Such domain authority suggests these brands are well-known and frequently discussed in industry discussions.
For a buyer evaluating this page, it’s crucial to consider what AI engines value most: recent reviews and third-party validation. Brands that score high in topical authority on Warehouse execution systems should be prioritized, as they likely offer solutions validated by current market trends and expert evaluations.
At a glance
What we observed in this category
Fortna leads the warehouse execution systems category with a composite score of 16.2, driven by a visibility rate of 12.5% and a citation rate of 25.0%, both well above the category averages of 1.2% and 5.6% respectively. Softeon sits second at a composite of 12.5%, matching Fortna on visibility but trailing on citations. The gap between first and third place is significant because Manhattan Associates, ranked third, holds zero visibility yet commands the highest citation rate in the category at 37.5%, creating a two-tier dynamic at the top.
The divergence between visibility and citation is the defining pattern in this category. Manhattan Associates is cited in 37.5% of responses but appears in zero named visibility queries, meaning the AI references it as a source or supporting evidence without surfacing it as a recommended brand. Fortna shows the opposite lean, with citations roughly double its visibility rate. Blue Yonder lost all its visibility (down 12.5 percentage points) yet retained a 12.5% citation rate, reinforcing that citation and named visibility are not moving in lockstep across this category.
Google AI Mode is the top engine for every brand in this dataset, indicating the audit is concentrated on a single engine. Among external sources anchoring AI responses, gartner.com and youtube.com appear at the top of the cited sources list, alongside trade publications including mmh.com and supplychaindigital.com. The presence of manh.com (Manhattan Associates' own domain) in the top cited sources list helps explain its high citation rate despite zero visibility, suggesting the AI is pulling from its content without naming it in direct brand recommendations.
Movers & shakers since last refresh
Biggest visibility risers
-
Fortna 0% → 12% · rank #18 → #1+12pp
Biggest visibility fallers
-
Blue Yonder 12% → 0% · rank #2 → #4-12pp
-
Infor WMS 12% → 0% · rank #3 → #7-12pp
-
SAP Extended Warehouse Management 12% → 0% · rank #4 → #8-12pp
The AEO ranking
| # | Brand | Visibility | Citation | Top engine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
fortna.com
|
12% | 25% | Google AI Mode |
Fortna leads all 20 brands with a composite score of 16.2, having risen from rank 18, with visibility and citation both exceeding category averages by a wide margin. |
||||
| 2 |
softeon.com
|
12% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Softeon matches Fortna's 12.5% visibility but its 12.5% citation rate is half of Fortna's, giving it a composite score of 12.5 versus Fortna's 16.2. |
||||
| 3 |
manh.com
|
0% | 38% | Google AI Mode |
Manhattan Associates holds the highest citation rate in the category at 37.5% yet records zero visibility, a stark divergence not seen in any other top-5 brand. |
||||
| 4 |
blueyonder.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Blue Yonder fell from rank 2 to rank 4 after losing 12.5 percentage points of visibility, though its 12.5% citation rate remains level with Softeon's. |
||||
| 5 |
made4net.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
Made4net sits at rank 5 with a composite score of 3.8, matching Blue Yonder on citations at 12.5% but recording zero visibility, the same pattern as three of the top five brands. |
||||
| 6 |
exotec.com
|
0% | 12% | Google AI Mode |
| 7 |
infor.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 8 |
sap.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 9 |
oracle.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 10 |
extensiv.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 11 |
locusrobotics.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 12 |
greyorange.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 13 |
6river.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 14 |
geekplus.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 15 |
generixgroup.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 16 |
mecalux.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 17 |
koerber-supplychain.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 18 |
tecsys.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 19 |
dematic.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
| 20 |
swisslog.com
|
0% | 0% | Google AI Mode |
Sources AI engines trust in this category
Across the 8 buyer-intent queries we ran on warehouse execution systems, 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 AEO 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 →
AEO 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 90 days and refresh this page automatically. How AI search ranking works →
Run an AEO audit on your own warehouse execution systems brand
The brands above were curated from public market-leader lists. Want the same answer engine optimisation 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 AEO for warehouse execution systems
Who leads AI visibility in warehouse execution systems?
Fortna leads with a composite score of 16.2, a visibility rate of 12.5%, and a citation rate of 25.0%, all well above category averages of 1.2% visibility and 5.6% citation.
Which brand has the highest citation rate in this category even though it has zero visibility?
Manhattan Associates holds a 37.5% citation rate, the highest in the category, yet records 0.0% visibility, meaning the AI references its content without naming it as a top recommended brand.
What sources does Google AI Mode anchor on most for warehouse execution systems research?
The top cited sources are youtube.com and gartner.com, followed by trade publications mmh.com and supplychaindigital.com, plus manh.com as a direct brand domain appearing in the source list.
Which brands have seen the biggest drops in AI visibility recently?
Blue Yonder, Infor WMS, and SAP Extended Warehouse Management each lost 12.5 percentage points of visibility, all falling to 0.0%, with Infor and SAP also recording zero citations.
How concentrated is AI visibility across the 20 brands in this category?
Visibility is highly concentrated: the category average is just 1.2%, and only Fortna and Softeon record any visibility at all, each at 12.5%, while the remaining 18 brands sit at zero.
Which engine dominates AI citation and visibility for warehouse execution systems brands?
Google AI Mode is the top engine for every brand in the dataset, indicating the entire audit reflects performance on a single engine with no distribution across alternative AI platforms recorded.