Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Prototyping & Handoff Platforms

Platforms that enable interactive prototyping, user testing, and developer handoff with design specs and asset export capabilities.

Brands tracked: 36
Brands analyzed: 36
Last updated: 2026-04-22
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 276
Total responses: 1,425
Top Brand Overall?
Figma
95/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Figma
86

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 Prototyping & Handoff Platforms

When users ask ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini about Prototyping & Handoff Platforms, Figma is the brand that surfaces first - unprompted, consistently, and usually at the top of any list the model generates. Framer 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 36 Prototyping & Handoff 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
 86
100
100
95
2
Framer
framer.com
 83
66
93
80
3
ProtoPie
protopie.io
 77
49
71
64
4
Axure
axure.com
 75
41
83
63
5
Balsamiq
balsamiq.com
 76
26
24
37
6
Adobe
adobe.com
 85
8
53
36
7
Sketch
sketch.com
 76
8
49
33
8
I
InVision
invisionwfm.com
 73
7
39
30
9
Marvel
marvelapp.com
 71
7
29
27
10
UXPin
uxpin.com
 70
17
10
24
11
Webflow
webflow.com
 83
8
17
24
12
Zeplin
zeplin.io
 76
8
14
22
13
Bubble
bubble.io
 86
9
9
21
14
Miro
miro.com
 84
8
8
20
15
Penpot
penpot.app
 66
11
7
19
16
UserTesting
usertesting.com
 78
8
8
19
17
Justinmind
justinmind.com
 64
6
6
16
18
Origami Studio
origami.design
 64
6
6
16
19
Proto.io
proto.io
 66
7
7
16
20
Abstract
abstract.com
 62
6
6
15
21
P
Principle
principleformac.com
 59
6
6
15
22
Anima
animaapp.com
 54
5
5
14
23
Avocode
avocode.com
 56
6
6
14
24
Flinto
flinto.com
 56
6
6
14
25
Maze
maze.co
 56
6
6
14
26
Mockplus
mockplus.com
 57
6
6
14
27
Moqups
moqups.com
 54
5
5
14
28
Overflow
overflow.io
 49
5
5
13
29
zeroheight
zeroheight.com
 40
4
4
11
30
Pidoco
pidoco.com
 40
4
4
10
31
Useberry
useberry.com
 38
4
4
10
32
Visily
visily.ai
 40
4
4
10
33
H
HotGloo
hotgloo.com
 34
3
3
9
34
Quant-UX
quant-ux.com
 28
3
3
8
35
Supernova
supernova.io
 31
3
3
8
36
S
Sympli
sympli.io
 6
1
1
2

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 276 shared Prototyping & Handoff 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 276 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 →