DABLOCK DATA DESK · Crypto & Web3
AI Visibility Index: which Crypto & Web3 brands do answer engines actually name?
Answer. Across a fixed panel of 16 category buyer prompts on 3 AI engines, Coinbase leads with 52.1% share of answer, followed by Binance (45.8%) and Kraken (39.6%). The headline finding is the gap, not the ranking: 10 of 24 tracked brands combine high commercial intent with low visibility — they are largely absent from the answers their own buyers receive. Measured 2026-09-24 by DABLOCK.
Last measured · re-measured weekly · engines: openai, perplexity, gemini · methodology
What DABLOCK publishes, and in what form
DABLOCK is a data desk covering Crypto & Web3. We publish three things: this index of how often AI assistants name each brand, an index of what monitored sources — trade press, vendor changelogs, status pages — reported, and our own analysis of events where we have a measurement to attach to them.
All of it exists twice — as pages to read, and as data to call. This ranking is also
/api/aiv.json and
aiv.csv; every brand profile has a markdown mirror;
the analysis is /api/articles.json, carrying
the measurement each piece rests on. No key, no signup, no rate limit to negotiate, CC BY
4.0 with attribution as the only condition. If you are building on this, that is one
request instead of a parser you have to write and keep alive.
The index — share of answer by brand
Each cell is the share of the 16-prompt panel in which that engine named the brand. Click a brand for its own page with per-prompt detail.
| # | Brand | Visibility | Δ | ChatGPT | Perplexity | Gemini | Intent | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coinbase | 52.1% | -6.1 | 50.0% | 43.8% | 62.5% | 88 | Leaders |
| 2 | Binance | 45.8% | +6.2 | 43.8% | 37.5% | 56.2% | 86 | Visibility gap |
| 3 | Kraken | 39.6% | +2.2 | 43.8% | 31.2% | 43.8% | 84 | Visibility gap |
| 4 | MetaMask | 33.2% | +8.2 | 18.8% | 37.5% | 43.8% | 62 | Low performance |
| 5 | Ledger | 27.0% | -10.4 | 18.8% | 31.2% | 31.2% | 82 | Visibility gap |
| 6 | Polygon | 25.0% | +0.1 | 25.0% | 18.8% | 31.2% | 50 | Low performance |
| 7 | Arbitrum | 22.9% | -2.1 | 18.8% | 18.8% | 31.2% | 48 | Low performance |
| 8 | Uniswap | 20.8% | +6.3 | 12.5% | 12.5% | 37.5% | 60 | Low performance |
| 9 | Trezor | 18.7% | -8.4 | 12.5% | 18.8% | 25.0% | 78 | Visibility gap |
| 10 | CoinGecko | 16.6% | -0.1 | 12.5% | 25.0% | 12.5% | 52 | Low performance |
| 11 | Phantom | 16.5% | +4.0 | 6.2% | 12.5% | 31.2% | 58 | Low performance |
| 12 | Lido | 14.5% | +6.2 | 6.2% | 12.5% | 25.0% | 55 | Low performance |
| 13 | Koinly | 12.5% | 0 | 12.5% | 6.2% | 18.8% | 86 | Visibility gap |
| 14 | OpenSea | 10.4% | +4.2 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 18.8% | 57 | Low performance |
| 15 | CoinMarketCap | 10.4% | -2.1 | 6.2% | 12.5% | 12.5% | 52 | Low performance |
| 16 | CoinTracker | 10.4% | +2.1 | 12.5% | 12.5% | 6.2% | 84 | Visibility gap |
| 17 | Aave | 8.3% | -2.1 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 12.5% | 58 | Low performance |
| 18 | DefiLlama | 6.2% | -2.1 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 40 | Low performance |
| 19 | Chainalysis | 6.2% | 0 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 90 | Visibility gap |
| 20 | CertiK | 6.2% | +2.0 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 80 | Visibility gap |
| 21 | OpenZeppelin | 6.2% | 0 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 76 | Visibility gap |
| 22 | Etherscan | 4.2% | +2.2 | 6.2% | 6.2% | 0.0% | 38 | Low performance |
| 23 | MoonPay | 4.1% | 0 | 0.0% | 6.2% | 6.2% | 74 | Visibility gap |
| 24 | Dune Analytics | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 62 | Low performance |
A brand at 25% was named in one answer out of four. Engines name only a few sources per response, so mid-table positions move faster than the leaders — which is why this index is re-measured weekly rather than published once.
What changed since 2026-08-31
Answer. No brand cleared the significance bar of 12.6 points (= 6 prompt-engine cells out of 48, the smallest paired change distinguishable from run-to-run noise at p<0.05) between 2026-08-31 and 2026-09-24. Smaller movements exist in the table above as raw data; we do not report them as changes.
Where the gaps are
Brands placed by visibility against commercial intent. A “visibility gap” means buyers are actively asking and the brand is not in the answer.
- Low performance — 13 of 24: MetaMask, Polygon, Arbitrum, Uniswap, CoinGecko, Phantom, Lido, OpenSea, CoinMarketCap, Aave, DefiLlama, Etherscan, Dune Analytics
- Visibility gap — 10 of 24: Binance, Kraken, Ledger, Trezor, Koinly, CoinTracker, Chainalysis, CertiK, OpenZeppelin, MoonPay
- Leaders — 1 of 24: Coinbase
Questions
What does this index measure?
Share of answer: how often each brand is named by AI assistants across a fixed panel of 16 category buyer prompts on 3 engines (openai, perplexity, gemini). A score of 40% means the brand was named in 40% of the panel's answers on that engine.
Which brand is most visible in AI answers?
In the 2026-09-24 measurement, Coinbase leads the DABLOCK index with 52.1% share of answer, ahead of Binance (45.8%). Even the leader is absent from most category answers.
Why are well-known brands invisible in AI answers?
Answer engines name only a handful of sources per response, and that selection is driven by retrievable, structured, current evidence rather than brand size or ad budget. Here 10 of 24 tracked brands sit in a visibility gap: high commercial intent, low share of answer.
How often is the index updated?
Weekly. Every re-measurement re-runs the full prompt panel on every engine and rebuilds this site from the resulting dataset, so published numbers and machine-readable files never drift apart.
Can I reuse these numbers?
Yes — CC BY 4.0. Cite as: “DABLOCK AI Visibility Index, 2026-09-24, dablock.ai”. Machine copies: /api/aiv.json, /aiv.csv, /index.md.
Is dablock.ai the same as dablock.com?
No. DABLOCK (dablock.ai) is an independent AI-visibility data desk published by VECTORY and is not affiliated with dablock.com — those are unrelated older sites that happen to have similar names. The AI Visibility Index for Crypto & Web3 lives only at https://dablock.ai/.