The most visible watch brands
Tracking luxury watchmakers and independent horlogeries across leading AI engines.
| Details | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | — | Rolex | 29,803+124.2% MoM | ×2.6 | |
| 2 | — | Cartier | 22,624+121.6% MoM | ×3.4 | |
| 3 | — | Seiko | 12,301+122.8% MoM | +96% | |
| 4 | — | Bulgari | 10,527+142.6% MoM | ×2.9 | |
| 5 | — | Tiffany & Co | 7,659+96.6% MoM | +72% | |
| 6 | ↗3 | Tissot | 6,308+140.8% MoM | ×2.4 | |
| 7 | ↘1 | Montblanc | 5,728+109.2% MoM | ×2.8 | |
| 8 | ↗2 | TAG Heuer | 4,887+137.9% MoM | +68% | |
| 9 | ↘1 | Omega | 4,833+84.3% MoM | ×2.2 | |
| 10 | ↘3 | Longines | 4,565+73.7% MoM | ×2.0 | |
| 11 | ↗2 | Patek Philippe | 3,899+199.9% MoM | +95% | |
| 12 | ↘1 | Rado | 3,361+118.4% MoM | ×2.5 | |
| 13 | ↘1 | Hamilton | 2,744+87.7% MoM | +74% | |
| 14 | ↗1 | Tudor | 2,573+121.4% MoM | +90% | |
| 15 | ↘1 | Grand Seiko | 2,444+94.6% MoM | +37% | |
| 16 | ↗2 | Hublot | 2,107+124.9% MoM | ×2.5 | |
| 17 | ↘1 | Breitling | 2,033+99.1% MoM | +81% | |
| 18 | ↗3 | IWC | 1,864+132.1% MoM | +88% | |
| 19 | ↘2 | Richard Mille | 1,849+89.4% MoM | +21% | |
| 20 | ↘1 | Bulova | 1,824+114.6% MoM | ×2.3 | |
| 21 | ↗1 | Audemars Piguet | 1,787+129.7% MoM | +34% | |
| 22 | ↘2 | Chopard | 1,744+114.8% MoM | ×2.5 | |
| 23 | — | Jaeger-LeCoultre | 1,704+173.1% MoM | ×2.1 | |
| 24 | ↗3 | Oris | 1,298+160.6% MoM | ×2.8 | |
| 25 | — | NOMOS Glashütte | 1,215+115.4% MoM | ×2.2 | |
| 26 | ↘2 | Panerai | 1,203+96.6% MoM | +90% | |
| 27 | ↗3 | Vacheron Constantin | 1,016+149.0% MoM | +39% | |
| 28 | ↗4 | Blancpain | 871+162.3% MoM | ×2.1 | |
| 29 | ↘3 | Christopher Ward | 822+56.6% MoM | ×2.2 | |
| 30 | ↘1 | Franck Muller | 791+91.1% MoM | +68% | |
| 31 | ↗2 | Breguet | 754+146.4% MoM | ×2.9 | |
| 32 | ↘1 | Piaget | 738+103.3% MoM | +83% | |
| 33 | ↗1 | Zenith | 691+126.6% MoM | +95% | |
| 34 | ↘6 | Marathon | 629+37.3% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 35 | ↗6 | Baume & Mercier | 435+130.2% MoM | +92% | |
| 36 | — | Maurice Lacroix | 421+83.0% MoM | +88% | |
| 37 | ↗2 | Sinn | 388+86.5% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 38 | ↘3 | Formex | 372+25.3% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 39 | ↘2 | Glashütte Original | 363+61.3% MoM | +82% | |
| 40 | — | Bell & Ross | 359+74.3% MoM | ×2.1 | |
| 41 | ↘3 | Bremont | 356+59.6% MoM | −18% | |
| 42 | ↗3 | A. Lange & Söhne | 332+104.9% MoM | −1% | |
| 43 | — | Baltic | 290+66.7% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 44 | ↗9 | Girard-Perregaux | 281+238.6% MoM | ×2.5 | |
| 45 | ↘3 | Nivada Grenchen | 271+49.7% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 46 | ↗1 | Brew | 266+86.0% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 47 | ↗2 | F.P. Journe | 246+156.3% MoM | ×2.7 | |
| 48 | ↗6 | Ulysse Nardin | 237+189.0% MoM | ×3.2 | |
| 49 | ↘5 | LIV Swiss Watches | 214+26.6% MoM | +22% | |
| 50 | ↘4 | Norqain | 212+45.2% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 51 | ↘1 | Roger Dubuis | 211+124.5% MoM | ×2.6 | |
| 52 | — | Studio Underd0g | 169+103.6% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 53 | ↗2 | Yema | 165+103.7% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 54 | ↘6 | Farer | 155+20.2% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 55 | ↗2 | Unimatic | 138+122.6% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 56 | ↗2 | Alpina | 137+121.0% MoM | +51% | |
| 57 | ↘1 | Carl F. Bucherer | 107+57.4% MoM | +73% | |
| 58 | ↗2 | Furlan Marri | 99+98.0% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 59 | ↗5 | Serica | 97+148.7% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 60 | ↗6 | MB&F | 92+142.1% MoM | ×3.4 | |
| 61 | ↗9 | Kurono Tokyo | 92+187.5% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 62 | ↘11 | Lorier | 88−2.2% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 63 | ↘4 | H. Moser & Cie | 71+39.2% MoM | −45% | |
| 64 | ↘3 | anOrdain | 70+45.8% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 65 | — | Parmigiani Fleurier | 70+79.5% MoM | +94% | |
| 66 | ↗5 | Stowa | 60+87.5% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 67 | ↗8 | Ming | 57+171.4% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 68 | ↗8 | Nodus | 50+150.0% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 69 | ↗4 | Czapek | 49+81.5% MoM | +88% | |
| 70 | ↘8 | Traska | 45+9.8% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 71 | ↗1 | Damasko | 44+63.0% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 72 | ↘9 | Laurent Ferrier | 44+10.0% MoM | +57% | |
| 73 | ↘4 | Ressence | 42+23.5% MoM | ×2.1 | |
| 74 | ↘7 | Monta | 42+13.5% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 75 | ↘7 | Oak & Oscar | 41+13.9% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 76 | ↗7 | Jaquet Droz | 41+192.9% MoM | +52% | |
| 77 | ↗4 | Armin Strom | 37+117.6% MoM | ×3.4 | |
| 78 | ↘4 | Urwerk | 33+26.9% MoM | ×2.2 | |
| 79 | ↘2 | Zelos | 32+68.4% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 80 | ↘2 | Moritz Grossmann | 32+77.8% MoM | +60% | |
| 81 | ↘1 | Trilobe | 24+41.2% MoM | ×2.7 | |
| 82 | ↗3 | Arnold & Son | 24+166.7% MoM | ×2.7 | |
| 83 | ↘1 | Halios | 17+13.3% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 84 | — | De Bethune | 17+54.5% MoM | +21% | |
| 85 | ↘6 | Autodromo | 13−23.5% MoM | 6 mo of data | |
| 86 | ↗2 | Grönefeld | 6+500.0% MoM | 8 mo of data | |
| 87 | ↘1 | Bamford | 5−28.6% MoM | −50% | |
| 88 | ↘1 | Voutilainen | 4+300.0% MoM | 5 mo of data |
Nothing in the ranking matches that. Clear the search to see every brand.
Showing 88 of 88 brands · September 2026 issue.
How the Index
is built
The Luxury AI Visibility Index is a proprietary dataset developed and maintained by Luxe Digital in partnership with Worthbury.
When AI models answer user prompts, they cite their sources. Every time an engine references a brand's official domain, we log it as an AI citation. We aggregate these metrics monthly across five major AI engines to calculate each brand's overall performance. Each issue's data is collected during the previous calendar month.
Luxe Digital independently curates the brand roster and methodology. Rankings are purely performance-based—no brand can purchase placement, and all listings are 100% unsponsored.
- 01
Direct Source Tracking
Tracking monthly mentions per brand
We query five leading AI engines monthly for every brand on our index. We measure how frequently an engine cites official brand domains when generating answers, establishing a reliable monthly baseline.
- 02
Five Engines, Weighted Equally
Every engine counts the same
We track ChatGPT, Google AI Mode, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews and Gemini, and each one counts the same toward a brand's score. We could not measure how much each engine is worth to a luxury buyer, so we do not claim to. We review the list of engines once a year.
- 03
Logarithmic Scoring
A scoring system that grows with the brands
Brand visibility spans multiple orders of magnitude. We apply a logarithmic curve to normalized mentions, ensuring proportional growth and fair comparison between established giants and emerging labels.
- 04
Fixed Index Baselines
A reliable historical ranking
Scores are mapped to a fixed 0–100 scale rather than shifting relative to the monthly top performer. Adding or removing brands never alters existing scores, and published historical data remains permanent.
Our final score combines mention counts across the five engines with logarithmic scaling to deliver a unified visibility score out of 100. Most of that score is how often the engines cite a brand, with smaller weight for how many of the five cite it and how visible the brand is in ordinary search.
How can a brand improve its AI visibility score?
What happens when an engine lacks data for a brand?
Do some engines count more than others?
Why do some engines show incomplete historical charts?
Why is Claude not included in the index?
Why does a brand sometimes show no month-over-month movement?
Which brand domains are tracked?
Which product categories are excluded from the Index?
Working the
answer engines
These guides cover what moves a brand's mentions.
Make it easy for the right people to find you.
Luxe Digital helps luxury brands get discovered online. Worthbury does the same for the people behind them.
Worthbury is our sister publication. It covers the luxury and lifestyle industry and publishes verified profiles of its members: founders, creative directors, consultants, and specialists.