Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Luxury Face Moisturizers

High-end hydrating creams and lotions from prestige brands emphasizing premium ingredients, sensory experience, and anti-aging or skin-brightening benefits.

Brands tracked: 43
Brands analyzed: 43
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 319
Total responses: 1,672
Top Brand Overall?
CeraVe
87/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
CeraVe
96

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
CeraVe
100

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
CeraVe
68

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

CeraVe is the default answer in AI responses for Luxury Face Moisturizers

When users ask ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini about Luxury Face Moisturizers, CeraVe is the brand that surfaces first - unprompted, consistently, and usually at the top of any list the model generates. La Roche-Posay 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 43 Luxury Face Moisturizers 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
CeraVe
cerave.com
 96
100
68
87
2
La Roche-Posay
laroche-posay.us
 85
78
56
72
3
Neutrogena
neutrogena.com
 80
39
37
49
4
La Mer
lamer.com
 86
9
46
35
5
Vanicream
vanicream.com
 80
21
24
35
6
Tatcha
tatcha.com
 81
8
46
34
7
SkinCeuticals
skinceuticals.com
 85
12
31
33
8
Augustinus Bader
augustinusbader.com
 84
8
39
32
9
Kiehl’s
kiehls.com
 88
9
29
30
10
First Aid Beauty
firstaidbeauty.com
 74
7
31
28
11
Drunk Elephant
drunkelephant.com
 73
7
28
27
12
Olay
olay.com
 84
8
23
27
13
Dr. Barbara Sturm
drsturm.com
 78
8
23
26
14
Eucerin
eucerin.com
 86
9
19
26
15
Sisley Paris
sisley-paris.com
 79
8
22
26
16
Cetaphil
cetaphil.com
 80
8
18
24
17
SK-II
sk-ii.com
 83
8
16
24
18
Clinique
clinique.com
 76
10
12
22
19
Chantecaille
chantecaille.com
 69
7
16
21
20
La Prairie
laprairie.com
 87
9
9
21
21
Sulwhasoo
sulwhasoo.com
 87
9
9
21
22
Aveeno
aveeno.com
 83
8
9
20
23
C
Clé de Peau Beauté
cledepeau-beaute.com
 80
8
8
20
24
Dr. Dennis Gross
drdennisgross.com
 83
8
8
20
25
Fresh
fresh.com
 82
8
8
20
26
Aesop
aesop.com
 78
8
8
19
27
Elemis
elemis.com
 80
8
8
19
28
Natura Bissé
naturabisse.com
 80
8
8
19
29
Tata Harper
tataharperskincare.com
 79
8
8
19
30
Valmont
valmontcosmetics.com
 78
8
8
19
31
111SKIN
111skin.com
 72
7
7
18
32
Caudalie
caudalie.com
 76
8
8
18
33
Darphin
darphin.com
 75
7
7
18
34
Omorovicza
omorovicza.com
 72
7
7
18
35
Perricone MD
perriconemd.com
 73
7
7
18
36
Biologique Recherche
biologique-recherche.com
 67
7
7
17
37
Decorté
decorte.com
 71
7
7
17
38
Lancer Skincare
lancerskincare.com
 65
7
7
16
39
Noble Panacea
noblepanacea.com
 67
7
7
16
40
Odacité
odacite.com
 66
7
7
16
41
Shani Darden
shanidarden.com
 64
6
6
16
42
Orveda
orveda.com
 59
6
6
15
43
EviDenS de Beauté
evidensdebeaute.com
 48
5
5
12

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 319 shared Luxury Face Moisturizers 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 319 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 →