How AI Search Is Recommending Pet Retail / Pet Supplies: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

August 2026 was a stable month for the pet retail category, with Chewy retaining the lead in valid recommendation coverage across both tracked months. Chewy's coverage moved from 20.9% in July 2026 to 25.6% in August 2026, keeping it ahead of PetSmart (24.7%) and Petco (24.4%). PetSmart closed part of the gap it held in July, moving from 22.5% to 24.7%, while Petco held steady between 24.0% and 24.4%.

The benchmark classifies all seven tracked brands as stable this month, with no significant risers or decliners. Chewy's 4.7-point gain in valid recommendation coverage was the largest movement in the category, but it remained within the range the benchmark treats as normal month-to-month variation. Chewy's rank-one recommendation rate also moved from 13.8% to 14.6%, and its top-three rate rose from 16.3% to 19.9%.

Across the two-month series, the coverage gap between Chewy and Tractor Supply widened from 9.3 points in July 2026 to 14.4 points in August 2026, a movement driven by Chewy's gain rather than a decline for Tractor Supply, which slipped only slightly from 11.6% to 11.2%. This continues the pattern set in July rather than reversing it: Chewy has led the category in both tracked months, and the gap with Tractor Supply has widened in each month of the series.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations (648 unique questions in July 2026 and 641 in August 2026) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe. Of those, all 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor in both months; 767 in July 2026 and 773 in August 2026 were relevant, with 33 and 27 irrelevant respectively. The public metrics use the 516 observations in July 2026 and 582 observations in August 2026 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 benchmark-level metrics below summarize the qualified dataset across both tracked months.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

AI Recommendation Trend

Valid Recommendation Coverage by Brand

The category's leadership cluster tightened slightly in August 2026, with Chewy defending the top position while PetSmart closed part of the gap. Chewy's 25.6% valid recommendation coverage led the category, followed by PetSmart at 24.7% and Petco at 24.4%.

No brand's movement this month exceeded the range the benchmark treats as normal variation, and all seven brands are classified as stable. The category-level picture reflects the combination of Chewy's and PetSmart's gains alongside modest declines for Tractor Supply and Hollywood Feed.

What Changed This Month

Chewy

Chewy's valid recommendation coverage rose from 20.9% in July 2026 to 25.6% in August 2026, a 4.7-point gain that was the largest movement in the category this period, within the range the benchmark treats as normal month-to-month variation. The leader's top-three rate rose from 16.3% to 19.9%, and its rank-one rate edged up from 13.8% to 14.6%.

Chewy's raw mention presence declined from 85.7% to 82.3%, meaning the brand appeared in fewer responses overall while being recommended more often in the responses where it did appear. Chewy is being surfaced less frequently but positioned more prominently when it is surfaced.

The brand accounted for 85 of the rank-one recommendations in August 2026, up from 71 in July 2026. Its valid recommendation count rose from 108 to 149.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt categories drove the additional rank-one placements, and which competitor lost those recommendations?

PetSmart

PetSmart moved from 22.5% valid recommendation coverage in July 2026 to 24.7% in August 2026, a 2.2-point gain that narrowed the gap to the category leader to 0.9 points. The brand's top-three rate rose from 15.5% to 18.7%, and its rank-one rate improved from 2.9% to 5.0%.

PetSmart's raw mention presence remained effectively flat, moving from 93.8% to 94.7%. The brand was already appearing in nearly every AI response, so its August 2026 gain came from converting existing presence into stronger recommendation positions rather than expanding reach.

The rank-one count nearly doubled, from 15 in July 2026 to 29 in August 2026, indicating a shift in how often PetSmart was the first-named option rather than a secondary mention. Valid recommendation count rose from 116 to 144.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which surfaces or prompt types produced the additional rank-one placements, and did any single platform drive the change?

Hollywood Feed

Hollywood Feed's coverage dipped slightly from 4.5% in July 2026 to 4.3% in August 2026, though its raw mention presence rose from 9.7% to 11.2%. The brand earned 25 valid recommendations in August 2026, up from 23 in July.

The brand's top-three rate rose from 0.6% to 2.1%, a 1.5-point increase, even as its overall coverage declined slightly. This suggests Hollywood Feed is appearing in more responses and securing stronger positions in a subset of those appearances, but the small absolute counts (12 top-three placements in August 2026) make the pattern fragile.

Net sentiment rose from 0.5 to 0.6, and the brand had no negative mentions in either month. With a 4.3% coverage rate, Hollywood Feed remains a niche player in AI recommendations.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which specific prompts generated the additional top-three placements, and are these repeatable or isolated to particular question types?

Petsense

Petsense held steady at 2.1% valid recommendation coverage in both months, the category's only flat brand on this metric. The stability in coverage sits alongside a large drop in presence: raw mention presence fell from 20.5% in July 2026 to 11.7% in August 2026, an 8.8-point decline.

Petsense earned 12 valid recommendations in August 2026, up from 11 in July, but its top-ten placements fell from 10 to 9. Average recommended rank improved from 3.7 to 3.0. The brand is being mentioned in fewer responses overall but maintaining a similar recommendation count within that smaller presence.

The divergence between declining presence and flat coverage is the notable pattern. Petsense appears less often in AI responses, yet when it does appear, it holds recommendation position.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which surfaces reduced Petsense mentions, and do the remaining mentions cluster around specific product categories or store locations?

Tractor Supply

Tractor Supply slipped from 11.6% valid recommendation coverage in July 2026 to 11.2% in August 2026, a 0.4-point decline. The brand's raw mention presence rose from 56.4% to 60.5%, continuing a pattern of broad visibility without corresponding recommendation strength.

Top-three rate rose from 2.7% to 4.8%, and rank-one rate improved from 0.8% to 1.6%, both moving upward alongside the modest decline in overall coverage. Valid recommendation count rose from 60 to 65.

The widening gap with Chewy, from 9.3 points in July 2026 to 14.4 points in August 2026, reflects Chewy's gain more than Tractor Supply's decline. Both brands remain in the same competitive tier, but the gap between them has grown in each month of the series.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which product or service categories drive Tractor Supply's recommendations, and where does it lose share to Chewy?

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

In August 2026, all 582 qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. The public benchmark therefore measures which retailer AI systems recommend when shoppers ask for a pet supply provider, and it cannot yet answer questions about pricing perception, value positioning, or direct head-to-head comparison dynamics. The pricing analysis response type did appear in the raw distribution at 49 observations, but no qualified observations were attributed to the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters. Retailers seeking insight into how AI positions them on price or in direct comparisons would need a deeper company-level analysis.

Brand Opportunity Summary

The benchmark identifies where attention is warranted across the pet retail category; a company-level analysis is needed to explain why specific movements occurred.

Evidence Behind the Benchmark

The aggregate metrics are built from prompt-level observations capturing the query, the AI surface used, the recommendation outcome, the rank of each brand mentioned, sentiment expressed, and citations where exposed. Company-level analysis can go deeper into prompt patterns, competitor dynamics, surface-specific behavior, and the external evidence sources that shape AI responses. Source presence in an AI answer is not automatically treated as proof of causation for a brand's recommendation position.

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-count movement: Brands like Hollywood Feed and Petsense have low valid recommendation counts (25 and 12 respectively in August 2026). Percentage movements for these brands can shift meaningfully from just one or two observations and should be read with that caution in mind.
• Qualified denominator: Brand-level percentages are calculated within the 582 qualified observations for August 2026, not the 800 raw prompt-surface observations. The qualified set is smaller because some prompts are irrelevant or reserved.
• Directional analysis: Month-over-month movement identifies changes worth investigating, but it does not by itself establish the cause of those changes. A brand gaining or losing recommendation credit is a benchmark movement, not a campaign result.

Next Step

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

The aggregate percentages answer the question of market position, but they leave the mechanics unexplained. Which high-intent prompts does a brand win, and which does it lose? When a brand loses a recommendation, which competitor takes the placement? What attributes do AI systems associate with each retailer, and which external sources are shaping those answers? These questions sit beneath the coverage rate and determine whether a brand's position is durable or fragile.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. It identifies the specific questions where a brand is underperforming, the competitor that is capturing those opportunities, and the external content that is influencing AI systems. That analysis turns the benchmark's directional signal into an actionable roadmap.

Request an AI visibility audit