The final line is a `complete` record. Without it this file is partial.


Summary: NiCE leads AI-engine visibility at 28% mention rate across 1,915 responses in 5 days, outpacing Genesys (25%) and Five9 (15%) with consistent 26–30% performance on all four platforms.

Summary: Sentiment skews heavily neutral (76%) with positive at 24% and negative under 1%, signaling factual positioning but limited differentiation in AI answers.

Summary: G2.com and Gartner.com appear in 158 combined responses without NiCE mentions—content investment on review and analyst sites can close competitive gaps.

NiCE achieves market-leading 28% mention rate across all tracked AI engines, 3pp ahead of closest competitor Genesys.

NiCE 28% mention rate vs. Genesys 25% across 1,915 responses; consistent 26–30% on ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity over 5 days.

Dominant share-of-voice in AI answers positions NiCE as default reference in contact-center and conversational-AI queries.

Monitor weekly to detect any Genesys content push; maintain citation velocity on nice.com (527 cites) and expand to review platforms.

G2.com and Gartner.com collectively cited in 158 responses where NiCE was absent, creating a high-value content gap.

G2.com 80 gap-source cites, Gartner.com 78; both appear in answers without NiCE while nice.com cited 527 times overall.

Review and analyst platforms drive AI answers but lack NiCE-specific content, allowing competitors to capture those queries.

Invest in G2 profile optimization and Gartner report syndication; test whether updated content lifts NiCE co-citation within 30 days.

Sentiment distribution is 76% neutral and 24% positive with near-zero negative, indicating factual but undifferentiated brand positioning.

1,124 neutral vs. 349 positive mentions (10 negative) across 1,483 total; pattern holds on all four platforms.

AI engines present NiCE as credible but rarely highlight unique value, limiting conversion lift from answer-engine traffic.

Test injecting differentiated claims (e.g., specific ROI, deployment speed) into nice.com content and monitor sentiment shift in next scan cycle.

Perplexity cites nextiva.com as top domain (not nice.com), diverging from ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini where nice.com leads.

Perplexity top domain nextiva.com vs. nice.com on ChatGPT/Claude and google.com on Gemini; nextiva.com also 104 gap-source cites.

Perplexity's citation algorithm may favor telecom-adjacent sources, giving Nextiva unearned visibility in contact-center answers.

Build Perplexity-optimized content on nice.com linking telephony and CX; monitor whether nextiva.com gap-source count drops in 14 days.


Summary: NiCE achieved a 26% mention rate across 2,210 AI-engine responses in the first 8 days of tracking, leading Genesys (23%) and Five9 (13%) in a workspace-wide scan of 625 queries.

Summary: Sentiment is overwhelmingly favorable: 365 positive mentions vs. only 10 negative across all platforms, with ChatGPT and Gemini driving the strongest positive tone.

Summary: G2.com and Gartner.com each appear in ~150 total responses but show up in 106 and 98 gap responses respectively, signaling a content opportunity where NiCE is absent from high-authority review contexts.

NiCE leads the competitive leaderboard with a 26% mention rate, 3 percentage points ahead of Genesys and double Five9's share.

NiCE: 26% mention rate, 1,520 mentions; Genesys: 23%, 1,307 mentions; Five9: 13%, 704 mentions across 2,210 responses over 8 days.

Early tracking shows NiCE holds top-of-mind position in AI answers, likely reflecting strong SEO footprint and recent brand momentum in contact-center queries.

Monitor consistency over the next 22 days to confirm the lead persists beyond the initial 8-day window before declaring a durable advantage.

Gemini delivers the highest NiCE mention rate at 28%, while ChatGPT lags at 23%, suggesting platform-specific content indexing differences.

Google's Gemini may prioritize newer or structured content where NiCE has invested, while OpenAI's index skews toward older or broader sources.

Test query phrasing and content formats optimized for ChatGPT's retrieval to close the 5pp gap with Gemini by day 30.

G2.com appears in 149 total responses but 106 gap responses where NiCE is absent, indicating missed visibility in peer-review contexts.

G2.com: 149 total citations, 106 gap citations; Gartner.com: 149 total, 98 gap; both rank in top-10 sources but over-index in non-NiCE answers.

Competitors dominate review-aggregator content that engines cite when NiCE is not mentioned, pointing to thin or outdated NiCE profiles on these platforms.

Invest in refreshing NiCE's G2 and Gartner profiles with recent case studies, user reviews, and feature comparisons to capture the 106–98 gap citations by day 60.

Sentiment is strongly positive (365 positive vs. 10 negative mentions), with ChatGPT and Gemini contributing 106 and 113 positive mentions respectively.

Total sentiment: 365 positive, 1,145 neutral, 10 negative; ChatGPT: 106 positive, 8 negative; Gemini: 113 positive, 2 negative.

Brand perception in AI answers is healthy, with negligible negative sentiment and broad neutral coverage that can be converted through targeted content.

Maintain current messaging and monitor the 10 negative mentions for recurring themes; prioritize converting neutral mentions by enriching cited sources with differentiation points.


Summary: NiCE appears in 26% of 2,219 AI-engine responses across 629 scans over 9 days, leading Genesys (23%) and Five9 (13%) in a cold-start workspace snapshot.

Summary: Sentiment is overwhelmingly neutral-to-positive (98% combined), with Claude showing zero negative mentions and ChatGPT the highest positive share (77% of its 137 mentions).

Summary: G2.com and Gartner.com each appear in ~150 total responses but 108 and 100 gap responses respectively—content investment on these review platforms could close co-mention gaps.

NiCE holds a 3-point mention-rate lead over Genesys (26% vs 23%) across all four engines in the first 9 days of tracking.

NiCE 26% mention rate, 1,520 total mentions; Genesys 23%, 1,311 mentions across 2,219 responses and 629 scans.

Early leadership suggests strong baseline visibility, though shallow data depth (9 days) means the gap may shift as scan volume grows.

Monitor weekly leaderboard movement over the next 21 days to confirm whether the 3pp lead persists or narrows.

Perplexity cites nextiva.com as the top domain for NiCE mentions, diverging from the nice.com pattern on ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini.

Perplexity topCitedDomain is nextiva.com; ChatGPT and Claude show nice.com, Gemini shows google.com.

Perplexity may be surfacing competitor or partner content more prominently, diluting owned-domain authority in that engine.

Audit Perplexity citation sources for NiCE queries and test whether owned content (nice.com) can displace nextiva.com references.

G2.com appears in 151 responses overall but 108 responses where NiCE was not mentioned, indicating a high-traffic gap source.

G2.com cited 151 times total, 108 times in gapSources; Gartner.com 151 total, 100 gap.

Review platforms drive significant answer volume but often exclude NiCE, suggesting incomplete or lower-ranked presence in third-party listings.

Invest in G2 and Gartner profile optimization (reviews, case studies, category positioning) to increase co-mention rate in these 208 gap responses.

Claude shows zero negative sentiment mentions across 151 NiCE appearances, the cleanest sentiment profile of any engine.

Claude: 48 positive, 267 neutral, 0 negative out of 151 mentions; ChatGPT has 8 negative, Gemini 2 negative.

Claude's training or retrieval may favor neutral technical content over opinion-heavy sources that surface criticism.

Monitor Claude sentiment over 30 more days; if zero-negative persists, prioritize Claude-optimized content for reputation-sensitive queries.


Summary: NiCE achieves 27% mention rate across 2,423 AI-engine responses in first 10 days of tracking, leading Genesys (24%) and Five9 (13%) in contact-center and conversational-AI queries.

Summary: Gemini delivers the highest mention rate at 29% with strongly positive sentiment (152 positive vs. 2 negative), while ChatGPT lags at 23% despite highest response volume (654).

Summary: G2.com appears in 126 responses where NiCE was absent but cited 180 times overall—content investment there and on gartner.com closes a measurable visibility gap.

NiCE leads the leaderboard at 27% mention rate, 3 percentage points ahead of Genesys and more than double Five9's 13% across all tracked engines.

NiCE 27% mention rate (1,628 mentions) vs. Genesys 24% (1,420), Five9 13% (731) over 2,423 responses in 10-day window.

NiCE holds top-of-mind position in AI answers for contact-center and conversational-AI topics, suggesting strong brand authority in training data.

Monitor weekly to confirm the lead persists as data depth grows beyond 10 days; track Genesys gap for early-warning signals.

Gemini delivers NiCE's highest mention rate at 29% with overwhelmingly positive sentiment, while ChatGPT underperforms at 23% despite largest response volume.

Gemini 29% mention rate (186 of 631) with 152 positive vs. 2 negative sentiment; ChatGPT 23% (153 of 654) with 109 positive vs. 8 negative.

Gemini's training corpus or ranking logic favors NiCE more strongly; ChatGPT's lower rate signals potential content or citation gaps in OpenAI's index.

Audit ChatGPT-specific citation patterns and test prompt variations that surface NiCE; double down on Gemini-optimized content to widen the lead.

G2.com and gartner.com appear in 126 and 109 gap responses respectively but rank high overall (180 and 163 citations), indicating untapped co-mention opportunities.

G2.com cited 180 times total but present in 126 responses without NiCE; gartner.com cited 163 times, present in 109 gap responses.

These review and analyst platforms carry authority but NiCE's presence there is incomplete, allowing competitors to capture visibility when those sources are cited.

Invest in G2 profile optimization, fresh reviews, and Gartner mention strategies; test if richer NiCE content on those domains lifts co-mention rate within 30 days.

Sentiment is strongly positive across all platforms (437 positive vs. 10 negative, 27:1 ratio), with zero negative mentions on Claude and Perplexity.

Overall 437 positive, 1,181 neutral, 10 negative; Claude 60 positive, 0 negative; Perplexity 116 positive, 0 negative across 10-day window.

NiCE's brand carries minimal reputational risk in AI answers; neutral dominance suggests factual, feature-focused responses rather than advocacy tone.

Maintain current messaging; monitor ChatGPT (8 negative mentions) for specific query patterns that trigger critical framing and address root causes.


Summary: NiCE leads AI-engine visibility at 28% mention rate across 1,922 responses in first 5 days, outpacing Genesys (25%) and Five9 (15%) with no prior-period baseline yet established.

Summary: Gemini and Perplexity deliver highest mention rates (30% each) while sentiment skews 76% neutral, 24% positive, and <1% negative across all platforms.

Summary: Gap-source analysis reveals g2.com, gartner.com, and fin.ai appear in 80+ responses without NiCE mentions—immediate content-investment targets to close competitive visibility holes.

NiCE captures 28% mention rate across all engines in early tracking window, leading Genesys by 3pp and Five9 by 13pp.

1,483 NiCE mentions in 1,922 responses over 5 days; Genesys 25%, Five9 15% in leaderboard; no previous-period data.

Early leadership position suggests strong baseline brand presence, but short data depth (5 days) prevents trend confirmation.

Monitor through day 30 to confirm sustained lead and identify any platform-specific erosion before declaring durable advantage.

Gemini and Perplexity tie at 30% mention rate, outperforming ChatGPT (26%) and Claude (28%) by 2-4pp.

Gemini 149 mentions in 503 responses (30%), Perplexity 117 in 395 (30%), ChatGPT 135 in 528 (26%), Claude 141 in 496 (28%).

Gemini and Perplexity may index NiCE-friendly sources more heavily or weight enterprise-software signals differently than OpenAI models.

Test query phrasing on Gemini/Perplexity to replicate 30% rate on ChatGPT; analyze topCitedDomain differences (google.com vs nice.com) for optimization clues.

g2.com appears in 80 responses where NiCE was not mentioned, alongside gartner.com (78) and fin.ai (84), signaling review-site and competitor content gaps.

gapSources: g2.com 80, gartner.com 78, fin.ai 84 citations in non-NiCE responses; nice.com cited 527 times overall.

Engines pull from third-party review and competitor sites when NiCE-owned content is absent, ceding narrative control to external voices.

Invest in G2/Gartner profile optimization and publish comparison content targeting fin.ai/crescendo.ai use cases to recapture 240+ gap-source impressions.

Sentiment distribution is 76% neutral, 24% positive, <1% negative, with ChatGPT showing highest positive share (104/372 mentions, 28%).

Overall: 1,124 neutral, 349 positive, 10 negative; ChatGPT 104 positive of 372 total sentiment-tagged mentions.

Neutral dominance reflects factual, feature-list responses; low negative rate indicates no reputation risk, but muted enthusiasm limits viral advocacy.

Ignore sentiment optimization for now; prioritize mention-rate growth on Claude/ChatGPT over tone shifts until data depth reaches 30 days.


Summary: NiCE leads the workspace leaderboard at 28% mention rate across 557 AI-engine responses in the first 30 days, edging Genesys (26%) and Five9 (18%) with zero negative sentiment.

Summary: Perplexity shows strongest performance at 31% mention rate, while Claude lags at 23%; all engines cite nice.com most except Perplexity, which favors amplifai.com.

Summary: G2.com and Gartner.com each appear in 61 total citations but show up in 34 and 33 gap responses respectively, signaling a content opportunity to close co-mention gaps with review and analyst platforms.

NiCE captures 28% mention rate across all engines in the first 30 days, leading Genesys by 2pp and Five9 by 10pp in a cold-start period.

NiCE 28% mention rate (446 mentions) vs. Genesys 26% (375 mentions) and Five9 18% (234 mentions) across 557 responses over 1 day of data depth.

Early leadership in AI answer visibility positions NiCE ahead of direct competitors, though shallow data depth limits trend confidence.

Monitor mention-rate stability over the next 14 days to confirm whether the 2pp lead over Genesys holds as scan volume grows.

Claude delivers the weakest mention rate at 23% while Perplexity leads at 31%, an 8pp spread suggesting platform-specific content indexing differences.

Claude 23% (30 of 129 responses) vs. Perplexity 31% (40 of 129 responses); ChatGPT and Gemini both at 28%.

Claude may index fewer NiCE-relevant sources or weight competitor content more heavily, creating a platform-specific visibility gap.

Test Claude-specific prompts in tracked topics to identify whether question phrasing or source diversity drives the 8pp shortfall.

G2.com appears in 61 citations overall but 34 gap responses where NiCE was absent, indicating review-platform content does not reliably trigger NiCE mentions.

G2.com cited 61 times total, 34 times in responses without NiCE; Gartner.com shows similar pattern (61 total, 33 gap).

Competitor profiles or third-party reviews on G2 and Gartner dominate answers when NiCE is not mentioned, revealing a co-citation weakness.

Invest in optimizing NiCE's G2 and Gartner profiles with keyword-rich case studies and feature comparisons to increase co-mention likelihood in review-driven queries.

Perplexity uniquely cites amplifai.com as top domain (52 mentions) instead of nice.com, diverging from all other engines.

Perplexity top domain amplifai.com vs. nice.com for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini; amplifai.com appears 52 times in topSources.

Perplexity's real-time web indexing may favor amplifai.com content freshness or link authority, creating a citation anomaly worth investigating.

Audit amplifai.com content strategy and backlink profile to understand why Perplexity prioritizes it, then replicate high-performing tactics on nice.com.


Summary: NiCE received zero mentions across 12 AI-engine responses in the AI Agents topic over 1 day of tracking (3 scans), establishing a cold-start baseline with no prior-period data.

Summary: All four engines—ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity—returned 3 responses each with 0% mention rate for NiCE, while tracked competitors (Parloa, Five9, Genesys, Boost.ai, Yellow.ai, Cognigy) also recorded zero mentions.

Summary: Ten domains dominate citations in AI Agents responses, led by delight.ai, eesel.ai, fin.ai, and ibl.ai (6 citations each); critically, all top sources appear exclusively in gapSources, meaning NiCE was absent from every response citing these platforms.

Summary: Data depth of 1 day limits trend confidence—findings below flag monitoring priorities and content-investment opportunities until multi-week corroboration emerges.

NiCE has zero visibility in AI Agents answers across all four major AI engines after 1 day of tracking.

0 mentions out of 12 responses (0% mention rate) across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity; 3 scans completed; dataDepthDays = 1; no previous-period data for comparison.

Cold-start baseline confirms NiCE is not yet indexed or recognized by AI engines for AI Agents queries, likely due to insufficient public content, backlinks, or brand signals in training data and real-time retrieval sources.

Monitor for 30 days to establish trend stability; if zero mentions persist across 10+ scans, escalate to content and SEO investment tied to AI Agents keyword clusters.

delight.ai, eesel.ai, fin.ai, and ibl.ai each appear in 6 of 12 responses but never alongside NiCE.

topSources shows delight.ai (6), eesel.ai (6), fin.ai (6), ibl.ai (6); gapSources lists identical counts for these four domains, confirming NiCE was absent from all responses citing them.

These four domains are authoritative sources for AI Agents content in engine retrieval; their consistent citation without NiCE co-mention indicates a content-distribution gap—NiCE lacks presence on or partnerships with these high-signal platforms.

Investigate partnership, guest-content, or integration opportunities with delight.ai, eesel.ai, fin.ai, and ibl.ai to secure co-citation in future AI Agents responses; prioritize platforms with existing vendor-directory or marketplace models.

asapp.com and lucidya.com each cited in 5 responses represent secondary content-investment targets.

topSources lists asapp.com (5 citations) and lucidya.com (5 citations); both also appear in gapSources with identical counts, confirming zero NiCE co-mentions.

These platforms have moderate but consistent citation frequency in AI Agents answers, suggesting they are recognized but not dominant sources; lower barrier to entry for content placement compared to the top-four domains.

Test content investment on asapp.com and lucidya.com (e.g., case studies, integration announcements, or co-marketing) as lower-effort experiments to break into gapSources before pursuing top-tier platforms.

All tracked competitors (Parloa, Five9, Genesys, Boost.ai, Yellow.ai, Cognigy) also recorded 0% mention rate in AI Agents responses.

leaderboard shows NiCE, Parloa, Five9, Genesys, Boost.ai, Yellow.ai, and Cognigy each with mentionRate = 0 and totalMentions = 0.

Zero mentions across the competitive set suggests either (1) the AI Agents query set is too narrow or generic to trigger vendor names, or (2) all tracked brands lack sufficient AI-engine visibility in this topic, creating a level playing field for early content investment.

Monitor competitor mention rates over 30 days; if the field remains at zero, expand query set to include use-case and integration terms (e.g., 'AI agents for customer service') that may trigger vendor recommendations.

One day of data depth prevents trend detection but establishes a zero-mention floor for NiCE in AI Agents.

dataDepthDays = 1; scans = 3; responses = 12; mentions = 0; previous-period scans = 0, confirming no historical comparison.

Single-day snapshot cannot distinguish between structural invisibility and natural variance in AI-engine answer generation; however, zero mentions across 12 responses (spanning 4 platforms × 3 responses each) is a strong early signal of absent brand recognition.

Ignore short-term noise and continue daily scans for 30 days to reach dataDepthDays = 30; re-evaluate findings when current-period vs. previous-period comparison becomes statistically meaningful (minimum 10 scans per platform).

botpress.com, cresta.com, devrev.ai, and aiagentsacademy.ai appear in 2 responses each, representing emerging or niche citation sources.

topSources lists botpress.com (2), cresta.com (2), devrev.ai (2), aiagentsacademy.ai (2); all four also in gapSources with matching counts.

Lower citation frequency suggests these platforms are either newer entrants, niche authorities, or less favored by AI-engine retrieval algorithms; however, their presence in answers indicates some editorial or algorithmic trust.

Monitor these four domains over 30 days; if citation counts grow to 5+ and remain in gapSources, consider targeted outreach or content collaboration to capture early-mover advantage in emerging AI Agents sources.