How AI Search Is Recommending Dog Gear, Collars and Outdoor Pet accessories: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

Tractive remains the coverage leader in AI-powered recommendations for dog gear, collars and outdoor pet accessories, holding 41.4% valid recommendation coverage in August 2026. The gap to the next brand stands at 1.2 points over Fi at 40.2%, a narrower margin than the 2.4-point lead Tractive held in July 2026, when it recorded 43.5% coverage.

This was a quiet month for the category. No brand's movement rose above the benchmark's normal month-to-month variation, and all four tracked companies are classified as stable. The strongest upward mover was Fi, which edged up 0.2 points from 40.0% to 40.2% and extended its raw mention presence from 52.1% to 56.1%. The sharpest decline came from Ruffwear, down 4.9 points from 41.1% to 36.2%, a movement the benchmark classifies as within normal month-to-month variation rather than a significant shift.

Fi and Ruffwear also swapped positions in the ranking between July and August. Ruffwear led Fi by 1.1 points in July; in August, Fi leads Ruffwear by 4.0 points, a 5.1-point shift in the gap between the two brands. Neither brand's individual movement was large enough to be classified as significant on its own, but the positional change is visible in this month's standings.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations (514 unique questions in July; 569 in August) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe. Of those, 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor in each month; 774 were relevant and 26 were irrelevant in July, while 738 were relevant and 62 were irrelevant in August. The public metrics use the 628 qualified observations in July and 594 in August that survive both qualification stages.

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

The following benchmark-level metrics summarize how the qualified pool behaved as a whole across the two months.

The intermediate movement between July and August shows a smaller qualified observation set in August, driven by a higher irrelevant count (62 versus 26). This means the August percentages are calculated on a tighter base, which slightly compresses the apparent coverage rates across the board.

AI Recommendation Trend

Tractive Holds the Lead in a Stable Category, While the Fi-Ruffwear Gap Shifts

Tractive leads at 41.4%, followed by Fi at 40.2%, Ruffwear at 36.2%, and Kurgo at 33.0%. No brand's month-to-month change exceeded the benchmark's normal variation range this month; the softening across the category reflects the combination of several modest declines, with Ruffwear's 4.9-point and Kurgo's 3.5-point movements contributing most to the overall picture. The distance between second and third place also shifted, from 1.1 points in July (Ruffwear ahead of Fi) to 4.0 points in August (Fi ahead of Ruffwear).

What Changed This Month

Tractive: Leader by a Narrowing Margin

Tractive's coverage slipped 2.1 points from 43.5% in July to 41.4% in August, yet the brand remains the category leader. The absolute valid recommendation count fell from 273 to 246 on a smaller qualified base.

Tractive's raw mention presence actually improved, rising 2.2 points from 55.7% to 57.9%, the highest in the category. Its top-three rate also edged up from 35.7% to 36.5%. The coverage dip therefore came alongside stronger presence and placement, suggesting the decline reflects a tighter qualified denominator rather than weaker recommendation performance.

The rank-one rate held nearly steady at 27.1%, down slightly from 27.4%. With 161 rank-one placements and 217 top-three placements out of 594 qualified observations, Tractive remains the most frequently surfaced brand at the top of AI answers.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt types are driving Tractive's rank-one placements, and whether the narrowing lead reflects softer performance on specific surfaces or a denominator effect.

Fi: Steady Gains in Presence, Stable Coverage

Fi is the only brand whose coverage moved up in August, rising 0.2 points from 40.0% to 40.2%. The movement is small and stays within normal month-to-month variation, but the direction lines up with a broader gain in presence.

Fi's raw mention presence jumped 4.0 points from 52.1% to 56.1%, the second-largest presence figure in the category. Top-three rate rose 2.4 points from 31.9% to 34.3%, and rank-one rate improved from 6.9% to 7.6%. The valid recommendation count actually declined from 251 to 239, but only because the smaller August qualified base reduced counts across the board; the underlying rate held steady.

Fi's presence and top-three gains outpace its coverage rate this month, though the coverage movement itself remains within normal variation and the 1.2-point gap to Tractive remains the headline figure.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which surfaces are driving Fi's presence gains, and whether the improving top-three rate converts into rank-one placements in future months.

Ruffwear: Largest Decliner, Still Solidly in the Mix

Ruffwear fell 4.9 points from 41.1% in July to 36.2% in August, the largest movement in the category this month. The valid recommendation count dropped from 258 to 215.

Raw mention presence slipped 2.2 points to 44.1%, and top-three rate eased 1.4 points to 30.5%. Rank-one rate held comparatively firm at 19.2%, down just 0.6 points from 19.8%. This means Ruffwear lost ground on breadth more than on top placement.

Ruffwear's average recommended rank ticked up slightly from 1.69 to 1.74 (a lower number reflects a stronger position), and it remains third in the category with meaningful rank-one presence (114 placements). The brand is still visible and still recommended, but the gap behind the top two has widened.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts or surfaces account for the coverage decline, and whether the stable rank-one rate indicates resilience on high-intent queries.

Kurgo: Sliding into Fourth

Kurgo declined 3.5 points from 36.5% in July to 33.0% in August, the second-largest drop in the category. The valid recommendation count fell from 229 to 196.

Raw mention presence slipped 1.7 points to 40.7%, and top-three rate dropped 1.2 points to 21.6%. Rank-one rate fell from 3.3% to 2.2%, giving Kurgo just 13 rank-one placements across 594 qualified observations, the lowest in the category.

The small-count caution applies here: Kurgo's rank-one rate of 2.2% represents 13 placements, a narrow base for drawing conclusions. The broader picture is that Kurgo trails the category on both presence and placement.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Whether the decline is concentrated in specific surfaces or prompt types, and which competitor is capturing the recommendations Kurgo loses.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

In August 2026, all 594 qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. The benchmark captured zero observations in the Pricing & Value and Multi-Brand Comparison clusters for this category.

This means the public benchmark answers the question "which brand does AI recommend for a dog gear need" but cannot yet speak to how AI surfaces brands when buyers ask about price, value, or side-by-side comparison. Those commercial questions remain open for company-level investigation.

Brand Opportunity Summary

The benchmark identifies where attention is warranted across these four brands; a company-level analysis is needed to explain why the patterns look the way they do.

Evidence Behind the Benchmark

The aggregate metrics are built from prompt-level observations covering 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

• Small counts, particularly for rank-one placements like Kurgo's 13, warrant caution when interpreting percentage changes.
• Qualified denominators (594 in August) differ from raw collection (800), and all percentages are calculated within the qualified set.
• No brand's movement this month rose to the level the benchmark treats as a significant shift; the category remained stable, with individual movements best treated as signals for future months rather than firm conclusions.

Next Step

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

The aggregate percentages answer which brands AI systems recommend most often, but they do not explain the reasons beneath the surface. Which high-intent prompts are won, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes AI associates with each option, and which external sources shape those answers remain open questions.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy.

Request an AI visibility audit