Public Goods AI Market Strategy Report - Essential Oils

Public Goods AI Market Strategy: AI Discovery and Recommendation Report

Answer Capsule: Public Goods is effectively invisible to AI systems in the essential oil category. Across 1,277 observations on six AI platforms in June 2026, the brand appears only 29 times (2.3% raw mention presence) and receives zero valid recommendations. Its modeled monthly AI Authority Value of $17,696 is the lowest in the category and derives entirely from visibility assist, not recommendation value. The clearest opportunity is building a public evidence layer from scratch.

Who This Report Is For

This report is for marketing, brand, and growth leaders at Public Goods who need to understand why the brand is absent from AI-generated buyer shortlists in the essential oil category and what must change to become recommendation-eligible.

Report Card

Executive Summary

Public Goods has no meaningful AI recommendation presence in the essential oil category. Across 1,277 observations spanning six AI platforms and three buyer-stage clusters in June 2026, the brand appears only 29 times, a raw mention presence rate of 2.3%. Of those 29 appearances, 28 are neutral mentions and 1 is positive. The brand receives zero valid recommendations across all platforms and all clusters.

The brand's modeled monthly AI Authority Value of $17,696 represents 0.09% of the total $20.6M monthly opportunity in the category. Every dollar of that value comes from visibility assist (the commercial signal of being mentioned neutrally) rather than from recommendation value. By comparison, category leader Plant Therapy captures $1.26M in modeled monthly AI Authority Value, and even the next-lowest brand, Revive Essential Oils, captures $114,565.

Public Goods is absent from every AI-generated buyer shortlist in the essential oil category. The brand is not recommended in consideration-stage prompts, evaluation-stage comparisons, or decision-stage pricing queries. Competitors are being recommended instead in every prompt cluster where Public Goods might be expected to appear.

What Public Goods Is Winning

Public Goods has no evidence-backed wins in AI recommendation visibility. The brand's single positive mention across 1,277 observations does not constitute a meaningful signal. Its neutral mention presence of 2.2% is the lowest in the category and is not commercially actionable.

The brand's strongest platform is Perplexity, where it appears in 3 observations and captures $16,353 in visibility assist value. This is the only platform where Public Goods registers any measurable AI presence, and it produces zero recommendations.

Where Does Public Goods Stand in AI Recommendation Visibility?

Public Goods is absent from every meaningful AI recommendation signal in the essential oil category. The brand has zero valid recommendations, zero Top 3 placements, zero rank-one placements, and zero Top 10 placements across all six platforms and all three public clusters. Its average recommended rank is not applicable because the brand is never recommended.

In the Best Essential Oil Brands & Top Picks cluster (consideration stage), Public Goods appears in 4 of 419 observations with a raw mention presence rate of 0.95% and receives zero recommendations. Category leader Plant Therapy appears in 229 observations with a 27.9% Top 3 recommendation rate.

In the Essential Oil Brand Comparisons cluster (evaluation stage), Public Goods appears in 25 of 429 observations, but all 25 are neutral mentions. The brand receives zero recommendations. Edens Garden, the second-ranked brand in that cluster, appears in 157 observations with a 19.1% Top 3 rate.

In the Essential Oil Pricing & Cost Evaluation cluster (decision stage), Public Goods appears in zero observations. The brand is completely invisible to AI systems when buyers are ready to purchase.

The gap is not subtle. Public Goods is not being displaced by competitors in specific prompts; it is not present enough to be displaced. The brand has no public evidence layer for AI systems to retrieve, synthesize, or recommend.

Core Metrics at a Glance

How Does Public Goods Compare to Category Peers?

The table below presents comparable signals across the competitor universe for June 2026.

Note: Only figures present in the source dataset are shown. Blank cells indicate data not published in this public packet.

Sentiment Score and What It Reveals

Sentiment Score is calculated as: (positive mentions x 1 + neutral mentions x 0 + negative mentions x -1) / total mentions.

For Public Goods in June 2026: (1 x 1 + 28 x 0 + 0 x -1) / 29 = 1 / 29 = 0.0345.

This score is misleadingly positive because it is based on only 29 mentions, 28 of which are neutral. A single positive mention out of 29 observations does not indicate favorable AI framing; it indicates that the brand is barely present. Classified sentiment is required before interpreting AI visibility. A positive recommendation, neutral reference, cautionary mention, and competitor-displaced mention are not equal, and counting all mentions together is not sound measurement.

Sentiment by Platform

Prompt Evidence: What AI Platforms Are Saying Instead

Perplexity / Best Essential Oil Brands & Top Picks Prompt: "What are the best essential oil brands?" Result: Public Goods was not mentioned. Plant Therapy, Edens Garden, and Rocky Mountain Oils were recommended.

ChatGPT / Essential Oil Brand Comparisons Prompt: "Compare essential oil companies for quality and price" Result: Public Goods was not mentioned. Plant Therapy, Edens Garden, and NOW Foods appeared in the response.

Google AI Overviews / Essential Oil Pricing & Cost Evaluation Prompt: "Which essential oil brands offer the best value?" Result: Public Goods was not mentioned. Plant Therapy and Edens Garden were recommended.

What Is the Clearest Path to Recommendation Eligibility?

The most direct opportunity is building a public evidence layer for the essential oil category from scratch. Public Goods needs to create the types of content that AI systems trust and retrieve: detailed product pages with ingredient transparency, third-party reviews, comparison articles, community discussions, and authoritative citations. Without this foundation, the brand cannot become recommendation-eligible on any platform or in any buyer-stage cluster.

A phased approach reflects the current baseline of zero:

• Phase 1 - AI Market Discovery Audit: Conduct a full audit across all 10 clusters and 6 platforms to map every prompt where Public Goods is absent and every competitor being recommended instead.
• Phase 2 - Recommendation Readiness Plan: Identify the specific content types, source layers, and citation architecture needed to make Public Goods recommendation-eligible in the essential oil category.
• Phase 3 - Owned Answer Layer Buildout: Develop product pages, comparison content, and transparency documentation that AI systems can retrieve and synthesize into positive recommendations.
• Phase 4 - Citation and Authority Layer Development: Build third-party review profiles, community content, and authoritative citations that create a retrievable evidence layer for AI platforms.
• Phase 5 - Monthly AI Visibility and Recommendation Tracking: Track recommendation coverage, Top 3 rate, sentiment, and citation sources monthly to measure progress from a zero baseline.

Why AI Recommendation Presence Matters in This Category

Public Goods is not just underperforming in AI discovery; it is absent. In a category where AI platforms are becoming a primary shortlist-building channel for essential oil buyers, being invisible means being excluded from consideration entirely.

The benchmark data shows that AI platforms are not simply echoing brand awareness. They are evaluating sources, weighing sentiment, and ranking options. Public Goods has no public evidence layer for AI systems to evaluate. The next move is not to chase diagnostic mention signals but to build the citation architecture that makes recommendation eligibility possible.

Methodology

• This report evaluates Public Goods against a fixed competitor universe of 10 essential oil brands using the LLM Authority Index benchmark dataset.
• The reporting window is June 2026.
• Six AI platforms were tracked: ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, and Google AI Overviews.
• A total of 1,277 observations were analyzed across all platforms and clusters.
• The competitor universe includes: Plant Therapy, Edens Garden, NOW Foods, Vitruvi, Young Living, doTERRA, Rocky Mountain Oils, Aura Cacia, Revive Essential Oils, and Public Goods.
• Three public high-intent clusters were analyzed: Best Essential Oil Brands & Top Picks (consideration stage, 1.0x multiplier), Essential Oil Brand Comparisons (evaluation stage, 1.25x multiplier), and Essential Oil Pricing & Cost Evaluation (decision stage, 1.5x multiplier). The full benchmark includes 10 clusters.
• Stage 0 extraction classified each observation by platform, prompt, company presence, sentiment, and recommendation rank.
• A mention means the company appeared in an AI-generated response, regardless of sentiment or recommendation status.
• A valid recommendation is a positive, shortlist-quality recommendation or ranked recommendation that earns recommendation credit. Neutral mentions, cautionary mentions, and comparison-anchor mentions are not counted as valid recommendations.
• Limitations: This is a point-in-time benchmark for June 2026. AI outputs can change as models update and source material evolves. Modeled values are estimates based on the valuation model described in the dataset and are not revenue, pipeline, or booked sales. This report is not a full audit or full market census. Only 3 of 10 total clusters are included in this public analysis.

This is an independent public analysis by CiteWorks Studio / LLM Authority Index. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Public Goods.

Understanding Your Brand's Full AI Recommendation Footprint

AI-led discovery is reshaping how essential oil buyers form their shortlists. The benchmark data makes clear that being mentioned is not the same as being recommended, and the gap between visibility and commercial influence is wide.

CiteWorks Studio works with brands to map where they appear across AI platforms, identify which prompts carry the most commercial risk, surface which sources are shaping AI answers, and build the citation architecture needed to improve recommendation-stage visibility. An AI Visibility Audit or AI Company Discovery Report shows a brand's full recommendation footprint across the clusters and platforms that matter most.