How AI Search Is Recommending Certificates of Deposits: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

Morgan Stanley is now the clear coverage leader in AI-driven certificate of deposit (CD) recommendations, with valid recommendation coverage of 32.7 percent in September 2026. That puts it ahead of Bread Savings at 29.9 percent, a gap of 2.8 points. This marks a decisive shift from July 2026, when Capital One led at 37.9 percent and Morgan Stanley sat at just 3.0 percent. The category has been reordered across the three-month tracked series.

The strongest upward mover is Morgan Stanley, whose coverage climbed from 3.0 percent in July to 32.7 percent in September (Up 29.7 points). Its top-three placement rate jumped from 0.0 percent to 21.3 percent over the same period, and its rank-one rate rose to 10.4 percent. Bread Savings also strengthened steadily, moving from 25.6 percent in July to 29.9 percent in September (Up 4.3 points), including gains in top-three and rank-one placement.

The sharpest decliners are the two brand-name entities that appear to have been re-identified at the start of the series. "Capital One" coverage fell from 37.9 percent in July to 0.0 percent in September (Down 37.9 points), while "American Express" fell from 37.0 percent to 0.0 percent (Down 37.0 points). These drops coincide with the appearance of "Capital One Financial Corp." and "American Express Co." as tracked names starting in August, a naming change that materially reshapes how coverage is attributed.

The September results extend an already-visible pattern. In August, Morgan Stanley had already moved to 27.5 percent, and it added 5.2 points in September on top of that. Bread Savings, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., and Wells Fargo & Co. each posted gains in both August and September, extending increases across the full tracked series, while the overall category shows a widening split between a leading cluster and a long tail of brands below 10 percent coverage.

This benchmark is built from 800 prompt-surface observations per month, covering 658 unique questions in September (530 in July). Of the September observations, all 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor; 251 were relevant to the category and 549 were irrelevant. The public metrics are based on the 211 observations that survived full qualification in September (203 in July).

Key Findings

Benchmark Context

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

Benchmark-Level Metrics

August 2026 sat between these two months with 204 qualified observations, and it was the month when the category leadership first flipped to Morgan Stanley at 27.5 percent. The August data also contains the first appearance of "American Express Co." and "Capital One Financial Corp." as separately tracked names, which is the likely source of the apparent collapses in the July-only brand labels.

AI Recommendation Trend

The category has been reordered around a two-brand leading cluster, with breadth concentrated at the top and a long tail of sub-10 percent brands below it.

Only Morgan Stanley's movement from July to September exceeded normal month-to-month variation, and it did so by a wide margin. The rest of the category's change came from a combination of smaller movements, plus the July-to-August re-identification of two brands that removed the former leaders from the tracked series.

What Changed This Month

Morgan Stanley: From single-digit presence to category leader

Morgan Stanley's valid recommendation coverage rose from 3.0 percent in July to 32.7 percent in September (Up 29.7 points). Its move from August to September was an additional 5.2 points, following the 24.5-point jump it posted from July to August.

The firm's raw mention presence rate went from 32.0 percent in July to 74.9 percent in September (Up 42.9 points). Top-three placement climbed from 0.0 percent to 21.3 percent, and rank-one placement went from 0.0 percent to 10.4 percent. In September, Morgan Stanley made 69 valid recommendations out of 211 qualified observations.

The distinction to notice is that Morgan Stanley is no longer just visible; it is being explicitly recommended. Its 32.7 percent coverage rate, plus 10.4 percent rank-one placement, indicates AI systems are now surfacing it as a first-choice option more often than earlier in the series, not merely mentioning it as one option among many.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which specific prompt themes within CD discovery are driving Morgan Stanley's recommendations, and which AI surfaces (for example, AI Mode or AI Overviews) are contributing the most to its rank-one placements?

Bread Savings: The steady second-place riser

Bread Savings moved from 25.6 percent coverage in July to 29.9 percent in September (Up 4.3 points), with 63 valid recommendations in September. Its top-three rate climbed from 2.5 percent to 17.1 percent (Up 14.6 points), and its rank-one rate rose from 0.5 percent to 4.3 percent.

The firm's raw mention presence also expanded from 29.6 percent to 38.4 percent (Up 8.8 points).

The distinction is that Bread Savings pairs broad coverage with very high sentiment, at 0.9 in both July and September. It is being recommended often and mentioned positively. Its coverage gain is not as steep as Morgan Stanley's, but it has held up across all three tracked months.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which AI surfaces are recommending Bread Savings most consistently, and what product attributes (yield, term, accessibility) are named in those recommendation contexts?

Bank of America Corp.: Rising into middle-tier relevance

Bank of America Corp. moved from 2.0 percent coverage in July to 6.6 percent in September (Up 4.6 points), a significant gain against its baseline. Its top-three placement rate went from 0.0 percent to 4.3 percent.

Raw mention presence rose from 56.2 percent to 59.7 percent (Up 3.5 points). In September, the bank appeared in 14 valid recommendations out of 211 qualified observations.

The distinction is that Bank of America is gaining recommendation ground from a very small base in the CD category, even though its presence has been steady. The movement is concentrated in recommendation quality, not just raw visibility. Absolute valid recommendations remain low at 14, so these percentage shifts come from a small count.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which competitor is losing recommendation share when Bank of America gains it, and which evidence sources support the bank's recommended placements?

U.S. Bancorp: From zero to measurable coverage

U.S. Bancorp moved from 0.0 percent coverage in July to 2.8 percent in September (Up 2.8 points), a significant rise from a zero base. It had just 6 valid recommendations in September from 211 qualified observations.

Raw mention presence moved the other direction, from 36.0 percent in July to 28.0 percent in September (Down 8.0 points), meaning the bank is mentioned less often but is now being recommended in a small number of cases.

The distinction is that U.S. Bancorp's presence is falling while its recommendation rate is rising. This is a small-count signal, with only 6 valid recommendations, but it suggests the bank is being recommended in specific contexts rather than broadly mentioned.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which narrow set of prompts produces U.S. Bancorp as a recommendation, given its declining raw presence but emerging recommendation rate?

Capital One and American Express: A brand-attribution shift

Coverage for "Capital One" fell from 37.9 percent in July to 0.0 percent in September (Down 37.9 points), and "American Express" fell from 37.0 percent to 0.0 percent (Down 37.0 points). Both are significant declines against their baselines.

The August data explains the shift: the tracked entity list changed from "Capital One" to "Capital One Financial Corp." and from "American Express" to "American Express Co." The July-only labels stopped appearing in August, and the new formal names began being tracked. This is a benchmark-instrument change, not necessarily a disappearance of the underlying brands.

Under the new naming, Capital One Financial Corp. holds 3.8 percent coverage in September with 8 valid recommendations. American Express Co. holds 1.4 percent coverage with 3 valid recommendations.

The distinction is that the underlying institutions remain present in the market, but their measured recommendation coverage is dramatically different depending on which name the benchmark tracks. This creates a double signal that needs careful interpretation.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Whether AI systems are recommending the brand under its formal corporate name less often than they did under the common name, or whether the observed drop is primarily an artifact of how prompts and responses were matched to the new tracked entities.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

All 211 qualified observations in September fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. None were assigned to the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters in this month's public benchmark. The public data therefore shows which issuers AI systems recommend, but it cannot yet answer how AI describes rate competitiveness, term value, or how issuers perform in explicit comparisons. Those questions require a deeper company-level analysis of the prompt-and-response data that sits behind these aggregates.

Brand Opportunity Summary

The benchmark identifies where attention is warranted; a company-level analysis is needed to explain why.

Evidence Behind the Benchmark

The aggregate metrics are built from prompt-level observations (query, surface, recommendation outcome, rank, sentiment, and citations where exposed). Company-level analysis can go deeper into prompt, competitor, surface, and evidence patterns. Source presence is not automatically treated as proof of causation.

About This Benchmark

This report is part of the LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery research program.

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

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

• The July-to-September series includes a brand re-identification event in August, where "Capital One" and "American Express" were replaced by "Capital One Financial Corp." and "American Express Co." as tracked entities. The apparent collapse of the former names is an attribution shift, not necessarily a loss of market presence.
• Several movements, including U.S. Bancorp's rise and Capital One Financial Corp.'s coverage, come from small absolute counts (3 to 8 valid recommendations). These percentages should be read alongside their underlying counts rather than as stable rates on their own.
• The qualified denominator (203 to 211 observations) is smaller than the raw collection universe (800 prompts), and brand-level percentages are calculated only within the qualified set.
• Movement between months identifies changes worth investigating; it does not by itself establish what caused those changes.

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 hide the questions that matter most for competitive position. Which high-intent CD prompts does each brand win? When Morgan Stanley or Bread Savings takes a recommendation, which competitor loses that placement? What product attributes do AI systems associate with each issuer, and which external sources are shaping those answers? None of those answers are visible in month-over-month coverage rates alone.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those underlying prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. It turns the benchmark's signal into an actionable diagnosis of where a specific brand wins, where it loses, and what is driving each outcome.

Request an AI visibility audit