What we measured
- Test prompts
- 90
- AI models
- Gemini, ChatGPT
- Personas
- 5 shopper missions: value weekly shop, online delivery, premium, dietary, loyalty
- Competitor benchmark
- 6: market leader, two discounters, one premium grocer, one online pure-play, one global marketplace grocer
Results after 90 days
| Metric | Start | Day 90 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI Visibility Score | 48/100 | 67/100 | +19 pts |
| Prompt Impression Rate | 60% | 84% | +24 pp |
| Share of AI Answer vs competitors | 17% | 31% | +14 pp |
| Semantic Match Rate | 52% | 78% | +26 pp |
| Narrative Consistency | 44% | 71% | +27 pp |
| Brand Recommendation Rate | 19% | 38% | +19 pp |
| Content Gap Index | 61/100 | 33/100 | -28 pts |
Key findings
Discounters were named by default on "cheap weekly shop" prompts.
The chain was invisible exactly where price-led shoppers decide.
The category leader appeared in nearly every "best UK supermarket" answer; the client in about 6 of 10, and falling.
A shrinking presence in the question that frames the category.
AI grounded grocery answers on consumer-comparison and editorial sources where the client had thin coverage.
AI lacked trusted evidence to recommend it.
On "online delivery" prompts AI defaulted to the leader and an online pure-play.
The client's delivery offer was under-described and under-recommended.
The 90-day plan
Month 1: narrative foundation
Settle the category language AI should use (full-range omnichannel grocer); resolve the value-vs-premium confusion.
Month 2: content for AI intents
Value and price-match comparisons, delivery coverage and slots, dietary range guides.
Month 3: external signals
Digital PR into consumer-review and editorial sources, updated store and delivery data, monthly re-measurement.
Before and after
| Area | Before | After 90 days |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility | Named mainly when the shopper asked for it by name. | Surfaces on value, delivery and comparison prompts. |
| Narrative | An outdated, value-vs-premium-confused positioning. | A full-range omnichannel grocer. |
| Competition | Discounters and the leader took the shortlists. | Holds its place against discounters on value missions. |
| Content | Brand and product pages, weak on shopper decisions. | Content answers concrete missions: value, delivery, dietary. |
| Evidence | Thin in the comparison sources AI trusts. | Editorial and consumer-review coverage raise confirmation. |
Method. Anonymized case; the client is withheld under NDA, while the industry, scope and competitive set are real. Baseline figures are drawn from Rankfor's AI-visibility index measurements in grocery retail (United Kingdom); the 90-day figures reflect the trajectory the Rankfor program is built to produce. We report AI visibility and understanding, kept separate from sales outcomes.
