How AI Search Is Recommending Cat Food, Litter and Cat Care: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

Tiki Cat remains the category leader with valid recommendation coverage of 60.1% in September 2026, essentially unchanged from 60.2% in July 2026. The gap between Tiki Cat and Smalls, the next closest brand, stands at 13.4 points, with Smalls at 46.7%. This is a stable leadership position that has held across all three tracked months.

The category's sharpest movement came from Pretty Litter, which was the only brand classified as a significant decliner. Pretty Litter's valid recommendation coverage fell from 6.8% in July 2026 to 3.9% in September 2026, a drop of 2.9 points. This marks a two-month down streak for the brand, which recorded 5.1% in August 2026 before the further decline.

Smalls was the strongest upward mover, with coverage rising from 42.1% in July 2026 to 46.7% in September 2026, a gain of 4.6 points. This continues a two-month up streak for the brand. No other brand's movement from July to September exceeded normal month-to-month variation, and no significant movement was recorded from August to September specifically.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations (582 unique questions in July, 630 in August, 625 in September) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe. Of those, all 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor in each month; 781 were relevant and 19 were irrelevant in July and August, while 787 were relevant and 13 were irrelevant in September. The public metrics use the 681 qualified observations in July, 668 in August, and 672 in September that survive both qualification stages.

Key Findings

Benchmark Context

The benchmark separates the raw collection universe from the qualified analysis set. Brand-level recommendation percentages are calculated within the qualified benchmark set.

With qualification confirmed, the following core metrics summarize how the benchmark's overall recommendation behavior shifted between the baseline and current month.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

August 2026 recorded 668 qualified observations, the lowest of the three months. The valid recommendation shortlist share peaked in August at 85.8% before settling at 83.3% in September.

AI Recommendation Trend

A Stabilized Upper Tier With a Notable Mid-Tier Decline

Tiki Cat's leadership position is stable, holding at 60.1% coverage in September 2026 against 60.2% in July 2026. The upper tier has settled into a recognizable order, with Smalls and Weruva both holding near 45% coverage. The notable exception to stability is Pretty Litter, whose decline from 6.8% to 3.9% over the tracked window makes it the category's only significant movement across the full series. No brand exceeded normal month-to-month variation from August to September specifically; the July-to-September changes reflect a combination of gradual shifts rather than a single sharp event.

Pretty Litter's decline of 2.9 points from July to September 2026 is the only brand-level movement classified as significant across the series. The remaining changes in the category reflect the combination of several smaller movements, none of which on its own exceeded normal month-to-month variation.

What Changed This Month

Pretty Litter Records the Category's Only Significant Decline

Pretty Litter's valid recommendation coverage fell 2.9 points from 6.8% in July 2026 to 3.9% in September 2026, a movement classified as significant. The brand recorded 5.1% in August 2026, meaning the decline has run across two consecutive months and is not isolated to a single month.

The brand held 46 valid recommendations in July 2026 and 34 in August 2026, before falling to 26 valid recommendations in September 2026. Raw mention presence declined in parallel, from 8.5% in July 2026 to 5.5% in September 2026, a drop of 3.0 points. The brand's top-three rate fell 1.4 points from 3.8% to 2.4% during the same window.

The distinction to notice: Pretty Litter's presence decline is wider than its coverage decline, meaning AI systems are mentioning the brand less often overall, not just recommending it less within a stable presence base. The rank-one rate held effectively flat at 0.7%, suggesting the loss is concentrated in secondary placements.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt categories or surfaces account for the declining presence, and are these prompts shifting toward brands with higher overall coverage?

Smalls Extends Its Gain Across the Full Window

Smalls' valid recommendation coverage rose 4.6 points from 42.1% in July 2026 to 46.7% in September 2026, the largest upward movement across the tracked series. The brand recorded 46.3% in August 2026, meaning most of the gain occurred between July and August, with only a 0.4-point rise from August to September.

Smalls held 287 valid recommendations in July 2026, 309 in August 2026, and 314 in September 2026. Raw mention presence rose from 44.9% in July 2026 to 49.1% in September 2026, a gain of 4.2 points. The brand's rank-one rate held steady at 25.7% in September 2026, very close to the 25.8% recorded in July 2026.

The distinction to notice: Smalls' coverage gain has been driven by broader presence across more prompts rather than by a shift toward first-position recommendations. Its rank-one rate has not moved materially, even as overall coverage climbed.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which incremental prompts added recommendation credit for Smalls, and are those prompts stable or recurring across the three-month window?

Tiki Cat Holds the Top Position

Tiki Cat's valid recommendation coverage was 60.1% in September 2026, essentially flat against the 60.2% recorded in July 2026. The brand recorded 63.0% in August 2026 before settling back, meaning the September figure represents a 2.9-point pullback from the August peak.

Tiki Cat held 410 valid recommendations in July 2026, 421 in August 2026, and 404 in September 2026. Raw mention presence was stable at 70.1% in September 2026, up slightly from 69.6% in July 2026. The brand's rank-one rate fell from 13.2% in July 2026 to 9.7% in September 2026, a decline of 3.5 points, even as overall coverage held.

The distinction to notice: Tiki Cat is being mentioned and included at similar rates, but the share of prompts where it is the first recommendation has declined. This is a placement shift within a stable presence base rather than a loss of visibility.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts moved Tiki Cat from first position to later positions, and which brand captured those top placements?

Dr. Elsey's Shows Modest Recovery From the August Dip

Dr. Elsey's valid recommendation coverage was 29.0% in September 2026, down 2.0 points from 31.0% in July 2026 but up 1.5 points from the 27.5% recorded in August 2026. The brand's rank-one rate rose to 17.4% in September 2026, up from 16.4% in July 2026.

Dr. Elsey's held 211 valid recommendations in July 2026, 184 in August 2026, and 195 in September 2026. Raw mention presence was 33.0% in September 2026, down slightly from 34.5% in July 2026. Sentiment held steady at a net sentiment score of 0.9 in both months.

The distinction to notice: Dr. Elsey's is recovering its recommendation credit after the August dip, and its rank-one rate has improved relative to July even though overall coverage remains slightly lower.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Whether the rank-one improvement is concentrated in specific prompt types or surfaces, and whether it can be sustained into the next measurement cycle.

Notable Gaps Reflect a Widening Separation From the Upper Tier

The gap between Pretty Litter and Smalls widened from 35.3 points in July 2026 to 42.8 points in September 2026, and it widened in each month of the series. This reflects the combination of Pretty Litter's decline and Smalls' rise across the same window.

Similarly, the distance between KitNipBox and Smalls grew from 41.4 points to 46.4 points, also widening in every tracked month. The gap between Dr. Elsey's and Smalls moved from 11.1 points to 17.7 points across the series, a widening that was not monotonic month over month.

Next inspection: Whether these gaps reflect a structural repositioning of the category toward a smaller set of high-coverage brands, or specific prompt-level dynamics that favor the leaders.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

In September 2026, all 672 qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. There were no qualified observations in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters. The public benchmark therefore measures discovery-and-consideration behavior well, but it cannot yet answer questions about price positioning, value perception, or head-to-head comparison outcomes in this category.

Brand Opportunity Summary

The benchmark identifies where attention is warranted across the brand set; a company-level analysis is needed to explain why individual brands move as they do.

Evidence Behind the Benchmark

The aggregate metrics are built from prompt-level observations capturing the query, the AI surface used, the recommendation outcome, any rank or position, sentiment, and citations where exposed. Company-level analysis can go deeper into prompt patterns, competitor presence, surface-level variance, and evidence sources. Source presence is not automatically treated as proof of causation.

About This Benchmark

This report is part of CiteWorks Studio's AI Market Discovery research program. Key links:

• AI Industry Market Discovery
• AI Industry Market Discovery Methodology
• AI Industry Market Discovery Metrics
• AI Industry Market Discovery Standards

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

• Movement in this report is directional. A change between months identifies where attention is warranted, but it does not by itself establish the cause of that change.
• Small counts matter. Brands like KitNipBox (2 valid recommendations in September) and Cat Person (5 valid recommendations) sit near the floor, and their percentage movements can swing from very few prompts.
• The qualified denominator (672 observations in September) differs from the raw collection (800 prompt-surface observations). Brand-level percentages are calculated within the qualified set.
• Pretty Litter was the only brand whose July-to-September movement exceeded normal variation. The rest of the category is best read as stable, though the notable gaps identify a widening separation between the upper tier and smaller brands.

Next Step

The Public Benchmark Shows Where a Brand Is Winning or Losing. A Company-Level Audit Shows Why.

The aggregate percentages in this report sit on top of individual prompt-level decisions. Which high-intent queries are won or lost, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes AI systems associate with each option, and which external sources shape those answers are all questions that the monthly benchmark surfaces but cannot answer on its own.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. Instead of tracking a single percentage, you can see the specific queries and surfaces where your brand wins, loses, or is absent, and what the AI systems say about you.

Request an AI visibility audit