Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Collaborative Design Platforms

Cloud-based services that combine prototyping, commenting, versioning, and team collaboration features to streamline cross-functional design workflows.

Brands tracked: 35
Brands analyzed: 35
Last updated: 2026-04-22
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 275
Total responses: 1,400
Top Brand Overall?
Figma
99/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Figma
97

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Figma
100

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
Figma
100

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

Figma is the default answer in AI responses for Collaborative Design Platforms

When users ask ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini about Collaborative Design Platforms, Figma is the brand that surfaces first - unprompted, consistently, and usually at the top of any list the model generates. Miro is a close second, but the gap between them is meaningful. If you're competing in this space and you're not in the top handful, you're effectively invisible to AI-driven discovery.

Brand Leaderboard All 35 Collaborative Design Platforms brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM with an LBA-based floor on Authority and TOM, see methodology). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Figma
figma.com
 97
100
100
99
2
Miro
miro.com
 83
54
82
72
3
Adobe
adobe.com
 94
23
76
56
4
Canva
canva.com
 94
31
39
49
5
Framer
framer.com
 82
16
54
43
6
Sketch
sketch.com
 79
11
55
38
7
Penpot
penpot.app
 71
23
15
30
8
I
InVision
invisionwfm.com
 67
7
42
29
9
Lucidchart
lucid.co
 88
9
19
26
10
Notion
notion.so
 82
8
18
25
11
Axure
axure.com
 74
7
20
24
12
Zeplin
zeplin.io
 74
7
21
24
13
Slack
slack.com
 96
10
10
23
14
Marvel
marvelapp.com
 82
8
10
21
15
Balsamiq
balsamiq.com
 70
7
11
19
16
Mural
mural.co
 80
8
8
19
17
UXPin
uxpin.com
 74
7
9
19
18
Abstract
abstract.com
 66
7
9
17
19
Proto.io
proto.io
 71
7
7
17
20
Uizard
uizard.io
 69
7
7
17
21
Whimsical
whimsical.com
 68
7
7
17
22
Justinmind
justinmind.com
 63
6
6
16
23
Moqups
moqups.com
 62
6
6
15
24
Avocode
avocode.com
 58
6
6
14
25
Fluid UI
fluidui.com
 55
5
5
14
26
MockFlow
mockflow.com
 55
6
6
14
27
Mockplus
mockplus.com
 51
5
5
13
28
Overflow
overflow.io
 49
5
5
13
29
wireframe.cc
wireframe.cc
 50
5
5
13
30
H
HotGloo
hotgloo.com
 39
4
4
10
31
Pidoco
pidoco.com
 39
4
4
10
32
Pixso
pixso.net
 36
4
4
9
33
Quant-UX
quant-ux.com
 34
3
3
9
34
Visily
visily.ai
 36
4
4
9
35
Creatie
creatie.ai
 16
2
2
5

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 275 shared Collaborative Design Platforms prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM. Authority and TOM are floored at LBA × 0.1 before the geometric mean (the same floor used in the per-metric cards above, so brand cards and the composite tell the same story). Formula: composite = ((LBA + 5)(Authority + 5)(TOM + 5))^(1/3) - 5. The floor keeps brands the model clearly recognises but doesn't yet recommend from collapsing to zero, while a single genuinely weak metric still pulls the composite down. Full methodology.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 275 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →