How AI Search Is Recommending Gold IRAs and Precious Metals Dealers: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

JM Bullion leads the category in October 2026 with valid recommendation coverage of 50.0%, a 1.1-point gap over APMEX at 48.9% and 11.1 points over American Hartford Gold at 38.9%. The leadership position changed hands from September 2026, when American Hartford Gold held first place at 44.5%.

The strongest upward mover versus the prior month is JM Bullion, up 5.7 points from 44.3% in September 2026, with a top-three rate of 44.9% and a rank-one rate of 14.0%. APMEX posted a 5.0-point gain to 48.9% coverage, its highest in the series, with a rank-one rate of 28.1%. The sharpest decliner is American Hartford Gold, down 5.6 points, extending a three-month downward streak from its July 2026 peak of 49.6%.

Against the May 2026 baseline, 9 of 10 tracked brands are significant risers, led by JM Bullion up 30.6 points from 19.4%, APMEX up 30.0 points from 18.9%, and American Hartford Gold up 26.0 points from 12.9%. Thor Metals Group recorded 0.0% coverage in both the May 2026 baseline and the October 2026 current period, with only a brief 0.3% appearance in July 2026. Recommendation-shaped answers and valid-recommendation coverage have risen substantially since the May 2026 baseline, with the top of the field now separated by 11.1 points between first and third.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe. In May 2026, the baseline measurement drew on 1,299 observations directly with no separate qualification funnel. In October 2026, those 800 observations resolved into 575 unique questions; all 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor; 792 were relevant and 8 were irrelevant. The public metrics use the 648 eligible observations that survive both qualification stages. The September 2026 run used the same funnel structure, yielding 654 qualified observations from 556 unique questions.

Key Findings

AI Response Inconsistency Alerts

Questions This Section Answers

• Where did AI platforms give conflicting information about Gold IRA company minimums and fees?
• Which brands had the most factual conflicts across ChatGPT, Copilot, Google AI Mode, and Perplexity?
• What pricing and designation claims did AI platforms disagree on for precious metals dealers?

Eleven critical or high-severity factual inconsistencies were detected across five AI platforms: ChatGPT, Copilot, Google AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity.

Augusta Precious Metals

AI platforms provided conflicting information about whether Augusta Precious Metals holds Money magazine's Best Overall Gold IRA Company designation. When asked "What is the best gold IRA company Money magazine?", ChatGPT stated that Augusta Precious Metals is listed as Best for Educational Resources, not Best Overall, citing the Money.com ranking page. Copilot stated Augusta Precious Metals is named by Money magazine as the best overall Gold IRA company, citing the same Money.com page along with One Percent Finance and an IRA Guidelines page that was flagged as rating the company "Best Overall Gold IRA Company" by Money Magazine.

AI platforms also disagreed on Augusta Precious Metals' minimum investment. When asked "What is the best gold IRA company Money magazine?", ChatGPT reported that no minimum was stated for Augusta, referencing Allegiance Gold's roughly $10,000 figure, while Copilot stated Augusta Precious Metals offers a $50,000 minimum investment, citing a One Percent Finance page that references the company's published $50,000 minimum.

Goldco

Four separate inconsistencies were detected regarding Goldco's minimum investment. When asked "How much money do I need to start a gold IRA?", Google AI Mode stated Goldco allows minimum initial investments starting around $10,000, while Copilot stated the minimum investment is $25,000, citing a metals retirement guide and a gold IRA accounts page. When asked "What is the best gold IRA to invest in?", Perplexity stated Goldco has no minimum deposit, citing Business Insider, while Copilot stated a $25,000 minimum investment, citing a gold IRA planners page and a side-by-side comparison. When asked "What's the best gold IRA?", Google AI Overviews stated a $25,000 minimum investment, citing a company page and Yahoo Finance, while Perplexity stated Goldco is best overall or for no minimum deposit, citing Investopedia, CBS News, and CNBC along with a Business Insider page. When asked "Who has the best gold IRA?", Copilot stated a $25,000 minimum investment while Perplexity stated no minimum deposit in some reviews, with both responses drawing on overlapping source sets including Business Insider.

APMEX

AI platforms provided conflicting live spot prices for gold and silver. When asked "How much is 1 gram of gold worth now?", Google AI Overviews stated 1 gram of 24k gold is worth approximately $132.88 USD, citing GoldPrice.org and JM Bullion, while Google AI Mode stated the spot price for 1 gram of gold is approximately $142.17 USD, citing APMEX and JM Bullion. When asked "What is the best spot price of silver today?", Google AI Overviews stated approximately $57.98 to $58.50 per troy ounce, citing APMEX and JM Bullion, while Google AI Mode stated around $64.31 to $64.91 per troy ounce, citing APMEX, Yahoo Finance, and Google Finance. Both silver responses cited APMEX as a source while producing non-overlapping ranges that differ by roughly $6 per ounce.

Noble Gold Investments

AI platforms provided conflicting information about Noble Gold Investments' fee structure and minimum investment. When asked "Is Noble Gold legitimate?", Copilot stated approximately $225 annually covers custodian and storage with no hidden setup costs in one response, and in a second response to the same question stated setup costs $80, annual administration costs $225, and storage costs approximately $150 per year, citing an IRA advisor review and a gold retirement guide that lists the storage fee separately. When asked "What's the best gold IRA?", Google AI Overviews stated a $20,000 minimum with lower promotional entry points, citing Yahoo Finance and Clute Journals, while Copilot stated the lowest entry point is $5,000, citing a gold IRA reviews page and a gold IRA accounts page.

JM Bullion

AI platforms provided conflicting silver spot prices when asked "How much is 1 oz of silver selling for right now?". Google AI Overviews stated the live market spot price for 1 ounce of silver is $65.11 USD, citing JM Bullion and iMGOLD, while Google AI Mode stated the current spot price is hovering around $57.40 to $58.40 USD, citing Kitco, JM Bullion, and APMEX. Both responses cited JM Bullion as a source while producing incompatible values.

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 July 2026 measurement introduced the current prompt funnel, with 800 total prompts, 511 unique questions, 790 relevant prompts, and 633 qualified observations. The August 2026 run yielded 629 qualified observations, September 654, and October 648. The September 2026 funnel included 138 reserved observations and 8 irrelevant prompts; October's funnel reserved 144.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

October's recommendation-shaped answer share of 48.3% and valid recommendation shortlist share of 69.0% are both substantially higher than the May 2026 baseline of 13.5% and 28.3%, indicating that recommendation-dense responses are now the dominant pattern in the benchmark compared with the start of the series.

AI Recommendation Trend

Questions This Section Answers

• Who leads the category in October 2026, and how wide is the gap between first and third place?
• Which brands posted significant prior-to-current movements in valid recommendation coverage?
• How has each tracked brand moved since the May 2026 baseline?

Leadership has rotated back to JM Bullion as the top cluster separates

JM Bullion has taken the October 2026 lead at 50.0%, following American Hartford Gold's September 2026 top position and JM Bullion's own August 2026 lead. The gap between first and third place is now 11.1 points, wider than the 0.6-point band that separated the top three in September 2026, as JM Bullion posted a significant gain, APMEX also gained, and American Hartford Gold posted a significant decline.

In October 2026, several brands exceeded normal month-to-month variation. JM Bullion posted a 5.7-point prior-to-current gain that is significant, and American Hartford Gold posted a 5.6-point prior-to-current decline that is significant. The category-level movement reflects the combination of these two significant shifts alongside smaller, non-significant changes across the mid-tier.

What Changed This Month

Questions This Section Answers

• Why did JM Bullion take the lead, and what drove its 5.7-point September-to-October gain?
• What caused American Hartford Gold's significant decline and three-month downward streak?
• Why does APMEX hold the strongest rank-one rate while remaining second on overall coverage?

JM Bullion

JM Bullion is the October 2026 coverage leader at 50.0%, up from 19.4% in May 2026, a 30.6-point gain that is significant across the series and the largest baseline-to-current rise among tracked brands. The brand's prior-to-current movement is up 5.7 points from 44.3% in September 2026, a significant gain that reverses a two-month pullback from its July 2026 peak of 48.8%.

Presence is the strongest in the benchmark, with a raw mention presence rate of 79.6% in October 2026, and 516 of 648 qualified observations mentioning the brand. Its top-three rate is 44.9% (291 observations) and its rank-one rate is 14.0% (91 observations), placing JM Bullion's strength in both broad shortlist inclusion and frequent top placement.

The distinction to notice is that JM Bullion leads on coverage while APMEX holds the stronger rank-one rate at 28.1%. A brand that appears in the recommendation set most often is not the same as one named first most often. The gap between JM Bullion and Thor Metals Group has widened by 30.6 points across the series.

Highest-priority diagnostic: which prompt types and surfaces drove the 5.7-point September-to-October gain, and whether that increase is concentrated in specific surface families such as Google AI Overviews or Perplexity.

American Hartford Gold

American Hartford Gold holds third place at 38.9% in October 2026, down 5.6 points from 44.5% in September 2026, a significant prior-to-current decline that extends a three-month downward streak from its July 2026 peak of 49.6%. Against the May 2026 baseline of 12.9%, the brand remains up 26.0 points, a significant rise.

Presence remains substantial, with a raw mention presence rate of 41.8% in October 2026, and 271 of 648 qualified observations mentioning the brand. Its top-three rate is 28.2% (183 observations) and its rank-one rate is 4.5% (29 observations), indicating that American Hartford Gold's strength lies in shortlist inclusion rather than top placement.

The distinction to notice is that American Hartford Gold's decline is significant while its rank-one rate of 4.5% remains far below APMEX at 28.1% and JM Bullion at 14.0%. The brand is frequently shortlisted but rarely named first, and its coverage lead from September has shifted to a third-place position as other brands gained.

Highest-priority diagnostic: which prompt clusters or surfaces that favored American Hartford Gold through August and September shifted their recommendations in October.

APMEX

APMEX holds second place at 48.9% in October 2026, up 5.0 points from 43.9% in September 2026, a non-significant prior-to-current gain. Against the May 2026 baseline of 18.9%, the brand is up 30.0 points, a significant rise driven primarily by a 25.2-point jump between May and July 2026.

APMEX's rank-one rate is 28.1% (182 observations), the strongest in the category in October 2026, and its top-three rate is 45.4% (294 observations). Its raw mention presence rate of 78.5% (509 observations) is the second-highest in the benchmark, indicating the brand is highly visible across surfaces.

The distinction to notice is between APMEX's rank-one dominance and its overall coverage position. The brand is recommended first more often than any other tracked brand in October 2026, and its 5.0-point gain narrowed the gap to JM Bullion to 1.1 points, yet it remains second on overall coverage.

Highest-priority diagnostic: which surfaces and prompt clusters award APMEX the rank-one position, and whether those wins are converting into broader shortlist coverage as the gap to the leader narrows.

Goldco

Goldco holds fifth place at 31.3% in October 2026, down 2.5 points from 33.8% in September 2026, a non-significant prior-to-current movement that begins a one-month downward streak. The brand remains up 19.4 points from its May 2026 baseline of 11.9%, a significant rise across the series.

Presence held steady, with a raw mention presence rate of 33.5% (217 observations) and a top-three rate of 23.9% (155 observations). Goldco's rank-one rate of 2.8% (18 observations) reflects its position as a consistent mid-tier presence rather than a top-choice brand.

The distinction to notice is that Goldco has declined for one month following a July 2026 peak of 37.3%, with the movement remaining within normal variation. The brand's valid recommendation count stood at 203 in October 2026, supporting the 31.3% coverage figure.

Highest-priority diagnostic: which surfaces or prompt types support Goldco's mid-tier position, and whether the rank-one rate of 2.8% shows room to convert presence into top placement.

Augusta Precious Metals

Augusta Precious Metals holds fourth place at 38.4% in October 2026, unchanged from 38.4% in September 2026, a flat prior-to-current movement. The brand remains up 26.4 points from its May 2026 baseline of 12.0%, a significant rise.

Presence held steady, with a raw mention presence rate of 40.1% (260 observations), a top-three rate of 32.4% (210 observations), and a rank-one rate of 18.4% (119 observations), the second-strongest rank-one position in the category. Augusta's valid recommendation count stood at 249 in October 2026.

The distinction to notice is that Augusta Precious Metals has held a stable position above 38% for three consecutive months, with neither significant gains nor significant declines. The brand's rank-one rate of 18.4% positions it between APMEX's 28.1% and JM Bullion's 14.0%, suggesting consistent top-three placement without displacing the leaders.

Highest-priority diagnostic: which prompt types and surfaces sustain Augusta's stable position, and what would be required to close the 10.5-point gap to APMEX.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

Questions This Section Answers

• Which buyer-intent clusters do the October 2026 observations cover, and which remain unmeasured?
• What can the benchmark not currently answer about pricing, fees, and head-to-head comparisons?

In October 2026, all 648 qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation intent cluster, which captures the broadest form of brand recommendation. The Pricing & Value and Multi-Brand Comparison clusters have no qualified observations in October 2026, meaning the public benchmark cannot currently answer questions about how AI systems position brands on price, fees, value, or direct head-to-head comparison. These remain material gaps in the commercial picture, since cost and comparison are typically high-intent moments in the buyer journey. The inconsistency data for October 2026 does surface pricing conflicts across platforms, but those observations fall outside the qualified benchmark set used for brand-level coverage metrics.

Brand Opportunity Summary

Questions This Section Answers

• What is the highest-priority diagnostic for each brand based on its October 2026 coverage signal?
• Which brands rest on small valid recommendation counts where movements may not be reliable?

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 Visibility Market Discovery research program.

• AI Visibility Industry Market Methodology
• AI Visibility Industry Market Metrics
• AI Visibility Industry Market Standards

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

• Small-count movements are flagged; brands including Advantage Gold, Orion Metal Exchange, and Thor Metals Group have fewer than 25 valid recommendations in October 2026, and their percentage movements rest on small absolute counts.
• The qualified denominator of 648 observations in October 2026 differs from the raw collection of 800 prompts; brand-level percentages are computed within the qualified set.
• The May 2026 baseline measurement used a different methodology without a separate prompt funnel; all later months use the current funnel structure.
• Movement identified here is directional and worth investigating; it does not by itself establish the cause of changes.

Next Step

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

Beneath the aggregate percentages sit the questions that matter most: which high-intent prompts are won, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes AI systems associate with each option, and which external sources shape those answers. The benchmark reveals the scoreboard, but not the mechanics behind each recommendation.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. It moves from what happened to what to do next.

Request an AI visibility audit