Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Independent Gin Labels

Boutique gin producers focusing on distinctive botanicals, small-batch distillation, and regionally influenced flavor profiles for craft cocktail markets.

Brands tracked: 38
Brands analyzed: 38
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 293
Total responses: 1,505
Top Brand Overall?
Sipsmith
67/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Sipsmith
94

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Beefeater
41

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
Sipsmith
99

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

Independent Gin Labels has no dominant brand in AI responses

Sipsmith is the top-ranked brand here, but its overall score of 67 reflects a competitive field rather than a dominant player. AI assistants answer category questions about Independent Gin Labels with varied recommendations from query to query - users get a different set of suggestions each time. This is the kind of category where mid-tier brands still have room to move up.

Brand Leaderboard All 38 Independent Gin Labels 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
Sipsmith
sipsmith.com
 94
30
99
67
2
The Botanist
thebotanist.com
 78
36
84
62
3
M
Monkey 47
monkey47.com
 90
20
85
55
4
Plymouth Gin
plymouthgin.com
 84
21
38
41
5
Beefeater
beefeatergin.com
 84
41
14
38
6
Four Pillars
fourpillarsgin.com.au
 94
9
43
36
7
Tanqueray No. Ten
tanqueray.com
 92
9
30
31
8
Aviation American Gin
aviationgin.com
 72
7
31
27
9
Gin Mare
ginmare.com
 80
8
26
27
10
R
Roku Gin
roku-gin.com
 87
9
22
27
11
Four Pillars Rare Dry Gin
fourpillarsgin.com
 88
9
14
24
12
Ki No Bi
kyotodistillery.jp
 85
8
14
23
13
Bombay Sapphire
bombaysapphire.com
 85
9
10
22
14
Hendrick's
hendricksgin.com
 91
9
9
22
15
Malfy Gin
malfygin.com
 80
8
14
22
16
Brockmans
brockmansgin.com
 77
8
13
21
17
Citadelle Gin
citadellegin.com
 84
8
8
20
18
Martin Miller's Gin
martinmillersgin.com
 82
8
8
20
19
St. George Spirits
stgeorgespirits.com
 82
8
8
20
20
Ableforth's Bathtub Gin
ableforths.com
 80
8
8
19
21
Caorunn
caorunngin.com
 77
8
8
19
22
Drumshanbo Gunpowder Irish Gin
drumshanbogunpowderirishgin.com
 79
8
8
19
23
Edinburgh Gin
edinburghgin.com
 78
8
8
19
24
Isle of Harris Gin
harrisdistillery.com
 80
8
8
19
25
Mermaid Gin
isleofwightdistillery.com
 77
8
8
19
26
Nordés
nordesgin.com
 80
8
8
19
27
Silent Pool
silentpooldistillers.com
 75
8
9
19
28
Kyrö
kyrodistillery.com
 74
7
7
18
29
No. 3 London Dry Gin
no3gin.com
 68
7
9
18
30
Nolet's Silver
noletsgin.com
 76
8
8
18
31
Tarquin's
tarquinsgin.com
 73
7
7
18
32
U
Uncle Val's
unclevals.com
 68
7
7
17
33
Dingle Gin
dingledistillery.ie
 67
7
7
16
34
Inverroche
inverroche.com
 58
6
6
14
35
Procera
proceragin.com
 42
4
4
11
36
Oxley
oxleygin.com
 38
4
4
10
37
An Dúlamán
sliabhliagdistillers.com
 36
4
4
9
38
Copperhead
copperheadgin.com
 35
3
3
9

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 293 shared Independent Gin Labels 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 293 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 →