Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Retail Brokerages

Online platforms that provide individual investors with self-directed trading of stocks, ETFs, options, and sometimes cryptocurrencies through user-friendly web and mobile apps.

Brands tracked: 33
Brands analyzed: 33
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 263
Total responses: 1,330
Top Brand Overall?
Fidelity
98/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Fidelity
93

Highest score on the LBA metric.

Authority Leader?
Fidelity
100

Highest score on the Authority metric.

TOM Leader?
Fidelity
100

Highest score on the TOM metric.

Fidelity is the default answer in AI responses for Retail Brokerages

When users ask ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini about Retail Brokerages, Fidelity is the brand that surfaces first - unprompted, consistently, and usually at the top of any list the model generates. Charles Schwab 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 33 Retail Brokerages brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Fidelity
fidelity.com
 93
100
100
98
2
Charles Schwab
schwab.com
 88
75
93
85
3
Interactive Brokers
interactivebrokers.com
 81
47
79
67
4
Robinhood
robinhood.com
 75
42
65
59
5
E*TRADE
etrade.com
 76
28
61
50
6
Vanguard
vanguard.com
 85
31
47
50
7
Thinkorswim
thinkorswim.com
 90
12
36
34
8
Webull
webull.com
 71
15
15
25
9
Merrill Edge
merrilledge.com
 70
6
31
23
10
SoFi
sofi.com
 71
6
20
20
11
tastytrade
tastytrade.com
 71
1
36
12
12
TradeStation
tradestation.com
 73
2
11
11
13
M1
m1.com
 68
0
10
2
14
eToro
etoro.com
 67
0
4
1
15
moomoo
moomoo.com
 73
0
0
1
16
Public
public.com
 69
0
2
1
17
5paisa
5paisa.com
 55
0
0
0
18
Ally
ally.com
 70
0
0
0
19
Betterment
betterment.com
 74
0
0
0
20
DEGIRO
degiro.com
 62
0
0
0
21
Firstrade
firstrade.com
 53
0
0
0
22
Freetrade
freetrade.io
 58
0
0
0
23
Groww
groww.in
 74
0
0
0
24
Kotak Securities
kotaksecurities.com
 67
0
0
0
25
Lightyear
lightyear.ai
 29
0
0
0
26
Questrade
questrade.com
 71
0
0
0
27
Saxo
saxo.com
 71
0
0
0
28
Stake
hellostake.com
 57
0
0
0
29
TD Ameritrade
tdameritrade.com
 74
0
0
0
30
T
Tiger Brokers
tigerbrokers.com
 70
0
0
0
31
Trading 212
trading212.com
 67
0
0
0
32
Upstox
upstox.com
 67
0
0
0
33
Zerodha
zerodha.com
 83
0
0
0

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 263 shared Retail Brokerages 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
Geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM: (LBA × Authority × TOM)^(1/3). Geometric mean is used so that any single weak metric pulls the overall score down, rather than being masked by strength elsewhere.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 263 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 →