How AI Search Is Recommending Cyber Insurance: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

Chubb remains the clear coverage leader in AI-driven cyber insurance recommendations, with valid recommendation coverage of 68.3% in August 2026, up 5.6 points from 62.7% in July 2026, a move within normal month-to-month variation. Travelers holds second place at 51.8% coverage, down 8.7 points from 60.5% in July, also within normal variation. Hiscox is stable in third place at 48.9%, down 0.2 points from July's 49.1%.

Five of the ten tracked brands recorded significant declines this month: Coalition, At-Bay, AIG, AXA XL, and Cowbell Cyber. Coalition shows the sharpest movement in the category, falling 17.1 points from 25.0% in July to 7.9% in August. This is a significant decline that includes a 10.9-point drop in top-three recommendations and a 4.0-point drop in rank-one recommendations, indicating the brand lost ground across recommendation shortlists broadly rather than simply shifting position within them.

At-Bay also recorded a significant decline, dropping 14.6 points from 17.5% to 2.9% coverage. AIG followed with a 7.7-point decline from 14.9% to 7.2%, and AXA XL fell 6.8 points from 9.7% to 2.9%. Cowbell Cyber dropped from 2.6% to 0.0% coverage, with zero valid recommendations in August. No brand recorded a significant increase this month.

Each month begins from a fixed pool of 800 prompt-surface observations (522 unique questions) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe, all of which mentioned a tracked brand or competitor. In July 2026, 274 of those prompts were relevant to the cyber insurance vertical and 526 were irrelevant, producing 228 qualified observations. The same prompt pool was re-run in August 2026, producing 139 qualified observations after the same qualification stages. Brand-level percentages in this report are calculated against the qualified observation count for each month (228 in July, 139 in August).

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.

The qualified benchmark set is the denominator used throughout this report. The table below expresses that same set as month-level metrics.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

The August data reflects a smaller qualified set than July, which narrows the statistical base for all coverage figures. The reduction in qualified observations from 228 to 139 means each percentage point represents fewer individual prompts, so brand-level movements should be read with this smaller denominator in mind.

AI Recommendation Trend

Coverage Standings Across the Tracked Brand Set

Chubb's lead over the rest of the category widened this month: the gap between Chubb and Coalition grew from 37.7 points to 60.4 points. Five of the ten tracked brands — AIG, At-Bay, AXA XL, Coalition, and Cowbell Cyber — recorded significant declines this month, while Chubb, Travelers, Hiscox, Beazley, and CNA held stable on the primary coverage metric.

What Changed This Month

Chubb

Chubb's coverage rose 5.6 points from 62.7% in July to 68.3% in August, a move within normal month-to-month variation. The brand's raw mention presence rate rose 17.6 points to 107.9%, meaning Chubb appeared in more than every qualified prompt on average. Chubb holds 57 top-three placements and 31 rank-one recommendations in August.

The brand's top-three rate rose 2.0 points to 41.0%, while its rank-one rate slipped 1.4 points to 22.3%. The average recommended rank improved from 2.48 to 2.35. Chubb's presence is broad and its recommendation share grew this month, even as its rank-one rate softened slightly.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt topics are driving the increase in Chubb's mention presence, and are those prompts converting into recommendation shortlists or remaining as neutral mentions?

Coalition

Coalition recorded the sharpest decline in the category this month, falling 17.1 points from 25.0% in July to 7.9% in August. This is a significant decline that appears across every placement metric: top-three rate fell 10.9 points to 3.6%, rank-one rate fell 4.0 points to 0.0%, and raw mention presence fell 16.7 points to 14.4%.

Coalition registered 11 valid recommendations in August, down from 57 in July. The brand held zero rank-one positions and only 5 top-three placements. Its average recommended rank improved slightly to 3.11, meaning that when Coalition is recommended it tends to sit higher in the list, even as it appears in far fewer shortlists overall.

The pattern here is a presence-and-recommendation decline together: Coalition's mention presence fell sharply, and its recommendation coverage fell further still. The brand moved from a mid-tier position to the lower tier of the category this month.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt categories drove Coalition's July coverage, and which AI surfaces stopped recommending the brand in August?

At-Bay

At-Bay fell 14.6 points from 17.5% in July to 2.9% in August, a significant decline in the primary metric. The brand registered only 4 valid recommendations in August, down from 40 in July. Its raw mention presence fell 13.3 points to 6.5%, and its top-three rate fell 4.1 points to 0.7%.

At-Bay's positive visibility rate fell from 18.4% to 3.6%, while its neutral visibility rate rose from 1.3% to 2.9%. The brand's presence and recommendation coverage both fell sharply this month.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which AI surfaces drove At-Bay's July presence, and what changed in those surfaces' handling of the brand in August?

AIG

AIG declined 7.7 points from 14.9% in July to 7.2% in August. This is a significant decline in the primary metric, though notably the brand's raw mention presence rose 1.3 points to 33.8%. AIG is still being mentioned, but it is being recommended far less: top-three placements fell from 7 to 0, and rank-one placements fell from 1 to 0.

AIG registered 10 valid recommendations in August, down from 34 in July. The brand remains visible in AI answers but has largely fallen out of recommendation shortlists.

Highest-priority diagnostic: When AIG appears in AI responses, which competitor is taking the recommendation slot that AIG previously held?

AXA XL and Cowbell Cyber

AXA XL declined 6.8 points from 9.7% to 2.9%, with only 4 valid recommendations in August. This is a significant decline in the primary metric; raw mention presence fell 5.4 points to 10.8% over the same period. Cowbell Cyber fell from 2.6% to 0.0% coverage, with zero valid recommendations, zero mentions, and zero presence across all six surface families in August.

For AXA XL, the brand still appears in some neutral contexts but is rarely recommended. For Cowbell Cyber, the brand recorded no qualified presence at all in August.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Are these declines concentrated in specific prompt types or surface families, or distributed evenly across the benchmark?

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

All 139 qualified observations in August fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. No qualified observations fell into the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters. This means the benchmark can report which brands AI systems recommend, but it cannot yet answer questions about how AI systems present relative pricing or structured head-to-head comparisons. Those commercial questions require a separate, targeted analysis.

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

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

• The August qualified set is smaller than July (139 versus 228 observations), so percentage movements reflect fewer underlying prompts and carry wider variation.
• The qualified denominator differs from the raw collection universe; brand-level percentages are computed within the qualified benchmark set only.
• This report identifies changes worth investigating. It does not establish the cause of those changes.
• Small-count brands (Cowbell Cyber at 0 valid recommendations, AXA XL and At-Bay at 4 each) require caution in interpreting percentage movement.

Next Step

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

Beneath the aggregate coverage percentage sit the questions that determine commercial impact: which high-intent prompts are won and lost, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses it, what attributes AI systems associate with each option, and which external sources shape those answers. The August movement in this category, particularly the declines at the mid-tier, invites investigation into the specific prompt and surface patterns behind the numbers.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. The public benchmark signals where attention is warranted; the audit explains why and defines the response.

Request an AI visibility audit