Which sources do AI assistants cite about executive coaches in Sydney?

Measured 2026-09-07 · First collection

The top 3 cited sources, by engine

Sample: 19 prompts, responses collected 2026-09-07 to 2026-09-07 (19 from ChatGPT, 19 from Perplexity, 18 from Google AI Overviews). Google AI Overviews has a lower response count because some prompts returned no AI Overview, and those are excluded from that engine's denominator. Excluded from citation counts: 26 prompts naming a specific business, per the TOP Score rules, and 111 prompts that stated no location, per the method. Percentages are the share of that engine's responses containing at least one citation of the domain. Ties: ChatGPT's first place is shared at 5 citations by clutch.co and digitalreference.co, and its third at 4 by bark.com and sydney.edu.au; Perplexity's second place is shared at 6 by danauerbach.com.au, drjodie.com.au and theleadershipinstitute.com.au; Google AI Overviews' first place is shared at 4 by executiv.co and unsw.edu.au.

What the data says

Three engines, three worldviews. ChatGPT reads the directories, and Clutch takes another category, its fourth on this site. Its co-leader digitalreference.co is a US HR-tech platform cited via its own 'best executive coaches in Sydney' listicles, and Google's top source executiv.co earns its spot the same way, so the directory layer here is really a listicle layer. Google routes the question to institutional authority, university short courses at Sydney and UNSW, as if 'find me a coach' meant 'train me as one'. Perplexity is the only engine citing practitioners' own sites in numbers, which makes it the one engine a solo coach can contest today with published thinking rather than a directory profile. The sample is on the small side, so treat the ordering as a first sounding.

How to read this page

• 1Citations are not mentions. This page measures which sources the engines link when they answer, not which businesses they name. Who gets named is the TOP Score, and it's measured separately.
• 2Engines disagree, so we never pool them. Each engine is reported on its own row because an average hides a total absence on the engine your buyers actually use.
• 3This is a measurement with a date on it. Models and retrieval change; a source moving between collections has not necessarily done anything. The method, cadence and limits are on the standard page.
• 4Ties are shown alphabetically and single-page sources are named. Where sources tie on citations, the table orders them alphabetically and the tie is stated under it. A domain's count can rest on a single page, often a "best of" listicle, and that concentration is itself part of what this site measures, so where it's true of a listed source we say so. Domains are counted by exact hostname, so government subdomains count separately.