How AI Search Is Recommending Fertility Clinics: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

CCRM Fertility remains the category leader in valid recommendation coverage at 29.5% in September 2026, despite a two-month downward streak from 33.9% in July 2026. The lead over second-place Shady Grove Fertility (22.3%) stands at 7.2 points, down from a 7.9-point gap in July. No brand exceeded the range of normal month-to-month variation this month, so the category holds its leader-led structure even as the underlying distribution shifts.

RMA Network recorded the strongest upward movement, with coverage climbing from 14.1% in July 2026 to 19.9% in September 2026, up 5.8 points across the series. The prior month saw a 5.1-point jump from August to September alone, the largest single-month move in this series for any brand, though the benchmark's series check classifies it within normal variation. Raw mention presence rose from 24.8% to 33.4%, an 8.6-point gain, with top-three rate moving from 5.4% to 10.8% and rank-one rate from 0.4% to 3.9%.

Kindbody is the sole significant decliner, with coverage falling from 14.5% in July 2026 to 7.5% in September 2026, down 7.0 points across the series. Raw mention presence dropped 8.5 points (22.7% to 14.2%), and the brand's gap to RMA Network widened every month, moving from a 0.4-point lead in July to a 12.4-point deficit in September.

This monthly benchmark begins with 567 prompt-surface observations (407 unique questions) in September 2026, up from 480 prompt-surface observations (391 unique questions) in August 2026 and 367 (302 unique questions) in July 2026. Of those, 567 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor in September (480 in August, 367 in July); 498 were relevant and 69 were irrelevant (424 relevant and 56 irrelevant in August; 318 relevant and 49 irrelevant in July). The public benchmark metrics use the 332 qualified observations in September, 305 in August, and 242 in July 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.

The qualified benchmark observations are the denominator used for every brand-level coverage percentage that follows. August 2026 sat between these months with 480 total prompts, 391 unique questions, 424 relevant, 56 irrelevant, and 305 qualified observations, also across six AI surface families.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

Recommendation-shaped answers were 77 of 242 qualified observations in July 2026, 80 of 305 in August, and 90 of 332 in September. Valid recommendation shortlists rose from 99 in July to 121 in August to 149 in September, meaning a larger share of a larger qualified set carried recommendation content by September.

AI Recommendation Trend

The Leader Holds While the Mid-Tier Compresses in September 2026

Pacific Fertility Center and Kindbody share the 5th-place coverage position at 7.5% in September 2026; Pacific Fertility Center moved up 2.5 points while Kindbody moved down 7.0 points. Across the series, CCRM Fertility's coverage declined without losing the lead, while RMA Network's sustained climb pulled the mid-tier toward the top. No single brand exceeded normal month-to-month variation in September; the category-level movement came from the combination of several ongoing shifts.

What Changed This Month

CCRM Fertility

CCRM Fertility's valid recommendation coverage moved from 33.9% in July 2026 to 29.5% in September 2026, down 4.4 points across the series, with a 2.0-point decline from August (31.5%) to September. This two-month downward streak stays within normal variation for the brand, and CCRM Fertility remains the category leader with a 7.2-point margin over Shady Grove Fertility.

Raw mention presence, however, fell from 67.4% in July to 57.2% in September, a 10.2-point change. The brand appeared in 190 of 332 qualified observations in September, generating 98 valid recommendations. Rank-one rate dropped from 19.0% to 10.5%, an 8.5-point decline, with 35 rank-one placements in September against 46 in July.

The distinction to notice: raw mention presence and rank-one recommendations moved more sharply than overall coverage, meaning CCRM Fertility still appears broadly but is named first less often.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt categories account for the loss of rank-one placements, and which brands are taking those top spots.

RMA Network

RMA Network recorded the strongest upward movement across the series, with coverage climbing from 14.1% in July 2026 to 19.9% in September 2026, up 5.8 points. The August-to-September jump of 5.1 points (14.8% to 19.9%) was the largest single-month move in this series for any brand, though it sits within the benchmark's normal-variation band.

Raw mention presence rose from 24.8% to 33.4%, up 8.6 points, with the brand present in 111 of 332 qualified observations in September. Top-three rate moved from 5.4% to 10.8%, and rank-one rate from 0.4% to 3.9%, with 13 rank-one placements in September versus one in July. Valid recommendations grew from 34 in July to 66 in September.

The distinction to notice: RMA Network's gains span presence, top-three, and rank-one simultaneously, a pattern distinct from a single-placement shift.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Whether the rank-one gains concentrate in specific prompt types or surfaces, and whether those are the same prompts where Kindbody lost ground.

Kindbody

Kindbody is the series' only significant decliner. Coverage fell from 14.5% in July 2026 to 7.5% in September 2026, down 7.0 points, including a 2.7-point drop from August (10.2%) to September. Raw mention presence moved from 22.7% to 14.2%, down 8.5 points, with 47 present observations in September against 55 in July.

Top-three rate declined from 7.8% to 3.3%, down 4.5 points, with 11 top-three placements in September versus 19 in July. Valid recommendations fell from 35 in July to 25 in September. Rank-one rate held roughly flat at 0.3%, with one rank-one placement in September.

The distinction to notice: presence and top-three coverage both fell meaningfully while rank-one stayed near zero in both months, meaning the recommendation share loss came from narrower placement rather than total disappearance.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts previously produced Kindbody recommendations and now surface another brand, especially RMA Network.

Notable Divergence: CCRM Fertility and RMA Network

The gap between CCRM Fertility and RMA Network narrowed from 19.8 points in July 2026 to 9.6 points in September 2026, a 10.2-point change that moved in the same direction each month of the three-month series. CCRM Fertility's coverage declined 4.4 points while RMA Network's rose 5.8 points, moving the two brands from a wide leader-challenger spread toward a closer contest.

Raw mention presence tells a similar story: CCRM Fertility fell from 67.4% to 57.2% while RMA Network climbed from 24.8% to 33.4%. The two brands now sit within 23.8 points of each other on presence, where they were 42.6 points apart in July.

This is a category-level pattern spanning two brands rather than a single brand's shift: the top of the field is compressing even as the leader holds its position.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt types drive both movements, and whether RMA Network's gains occur in the same queries where CCRM Fertility lost rank-one placement.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

All 332 qualified observations in September 2026 fell into the Brand Recommendation class, consistent with July and August 2026. The public benchmark cannot yet answer pricing, value, or head-to-head comparison questions for fertility clinics, as no qualified observations were captured in those clusters across the three-month series. Commercial questions about cost positioning and direct comparison remain beyond what this public data supports.

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

• Qualified denominators (242 in July 2026, 305 in August 2026, 332 in September 2026) differ from raw collection counts (367, 480, and 567); all coverage percentages use the qualified set.
• Small-count movements, such as US Fertility holding no valid recommendation and Illume Fertility holding two, reflect individual observations and may not indicate a durable pattern.
• The three-month series analysis (July–September 2026) classifies Kindbody as a significant decliner across the full period, even though no single brand exceeded normal variation between August and September. Movement across the series identifies changes worth investigating; it does not by itself establish cause.

Next Step

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

Beneath the aggregate coverage percentages lie specific questions: which high-intent prompts does a brand win, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes do AI systems associate with each clinic, and which external sources shape those answers. The public benchmark shows the scoreboard; it does not reveal the plays that produced it.

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