ZaiNar in AI Answers
Spatial Intelligence & Physical AI Infrastructure — 5-Platform Analysis
Executive Summary
ZaiNar achieves 100% visibility when explicitly searched (branded queries), confirming strong owned content indexing. However, organic discovery is essentially zero — ZaiNar appeared in only 1 of 100 unbranded tests (1%). The "Physical AI infrastructure" positioning has not translated into AI platform awareness. Technology approaches (UWB, BLE, beacons) and established players (Infsoft, Ericsson, Cisco) dominate competitive responses.
Key Performance Indicators
Filter by AI platform to see performance variation. Click a platform button to view platform-specific metrics.
Query Category Breakdown
Performance by strategic category. Filter by platform to see which categories perform best on each AI system.
AI Platform Comparison
Performance varies significantly across platforms. Click a platform card to filter all dashboard sections.
Source Analysis
Understanding which sources AI platforms cite reveals opportunities. Toggle between source categories to see owned media, earned media targets, and competitive landscape.
ZaiNar Owned Properties
89 total owned citations — all from branded queries only
Owned Media Assessment
ZaiNar's owned properties are well-indexed and consistently cited when users explicitly search for "ZaiNar." This is the expected baseline performance.
Critical Gap: Zero unbranded citations. ZaiNar.com content is not being surfaced when users search for positioning solutions without mentioning ZaiNar by name.
Recommendation: Develop thought leadership content on zainartech.com that targets unbranded category queries (e.g., "5G positioning technology comparison," "Physical AI infrastructure guide").
Who Appears Instead of ZaiNar?
Competitors and technology approaches mentioned in unbranded queries — the responses ZaiNar should be appearing in.
Technology Approaches (Most Mentioned)
Named Competitors (Unbranded)
All Test Results
Complete query-level data. Filter by category, platform, or result type.
| Query | Type | Category | Platform | Mentioned | Featured | Competitors |
|---|
Study Parameters & Limitations
Study Parameters
- 30 unique queries tested across 5 AI platforms
- 150 total tests (30 × 5 platforms)
- 100% success rate — all tests completed
- Query mix: 10 branded (33%), 20 unbranded (67%)
- Platforms: ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, Meta Llama
- Date: January 13, 2026
AEO Score Formula
- AEO Score = (Featured × 0.7) + (Top × 0.3)
- Featured Rate: 1% (1 of 100 unbranded)
- Top Rate: 1% (1 of 100 unbranded)
- Branded Rate: 100% (quality gate — not in score)
- ZaiNar AEO Score: 1.0
Limitations
- Snapshot in time — AI responses vary by day/session
- Query phrasing significantly influences results
- 30-query sample may not capture all relevant searches
- Does not measure actual buyer decision-making
- Platform algorithms evolve continuously
- "Physical AI" is an emerging term
Recommended Use
- Treat as directional baseline, not definitive truth
- Compare against future measurements to track progress
- Combine with other visibility metrics
- Use competitive data to inform media targeting
- Quarterly re-testing recommended