How AI Search Is Recommending Raw Freeze-Dried and Biologically Appropriate Pet Food: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

Orijen (Champion Petfoods) remains the coverage leader in October 2026, with valid recommendation coverage of 69.1%, up from 65.7% in July 2026. Its lead over second-place Stella & Chewy's held close to flat at 22.2 points in October, compared with 22.7 points in July. Orijen's 69.1% is the highest coverage figure recorded by any brand in the four-month benchmark, even as its top-three and rank-one placement rates sit below their July levels.

Acana (Champion Petfoods) is the month's largest riser and the only brand the benchmark classifies as a significant mover. Coverage moved from 39.5% in September to 50.0% in October, an increase of 10.5 points, and from 37.3% in July, a cumulative gain of 12.7 points. That move passed the benchmark's significance threshold in both the baseline and prior-month comparisons. It is the first significant movement recorded in this category since the series began.

The sharpest decline belongs to Champion Petfoods, where coverage eased to 1.2% in October from 3.4% in August and 0.8% in July, extending a two-month downward streak that the benchmark still classifies as stable. Stella & Chewy's recovered from a September dip, moving from 41.9% to 46.9%. Orijen's October coverage rose 9.3 points from September even as its top-three rate fell to 25.8% from 37.6% in July and its rank-one rate fell to 16.0% from 25.4%.

Against the full series, October broke the quiet pattern of the previous three months: where July, August, and September produced no significant brand movement, October produced one significant riser and a widening gap between Acana and the brands ranked below it.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations (580 unique questions in October, versus 565 in September, 571 in August, and 562 in July) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe. Of those, all 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor; 694 were relevant and 106 were irrelevant in October, against 704 relevant and 96 irrelevant in September, 711 and 89 in August, and 694 and 106 in July. The public metrics use the 418 observations in October (413 in September, 411 in August, 402 in July) that survive both qualification stages.

Key Findings

AI Response Inconsistency Alerts

Questions This Section Answers

• Which platforms disagreed about Acana and Orijen product availability?
• What kinds of claims — availability, ownership, recalls, or manufacturing — generated the most AI conflicts?

The benchmark's conflict analysis detected 41 critical and high-severity factual inconsistencies across six AI platforms: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity. The conflicts cluster around product availability, corporate ownership, recall history, and manufacturer-related claims for Acana (Champion Petfoods), Orijen (Champion Petfoods), and Champion Petfoods.

Acana (Champion Petfoods)

Twenty-one critical and high-severity inconsistencies were detected for Acana, spanning all six platforms and primarily involving retail availability claims.

PetSmart availability (critical, confidence 1.0). Five separate conflicts turn on the same question, "Why does Petsmart not carry ACANA?" Copilot stated that "PetSmart does carry ACANA now; added in mid-2020s, available in-store and online," citing Instacart store pages. Google AI Overviews, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Mode, and ChatGPT each took the opposite position, variously stating that PetSmart does not carry ACANA because Champion Petfoods limits distribution, has channel agreements, does not authorize or supply products to PetSmart, or is not an authorized retailer. Sources cited on the "does not carry" side included Petco's ACANA brand page, a Facebook group post titled "Acana and Orijen Pet Food Made in Canada," and a YouTube video titled "The Downfall of Orijen and Acana."

Current availability on Chewy (critical, confidence 0.95). When asked "Why did Chewy stop selling ACANA?", ChatGPT claimed "ACANA is once again available on Chewy; the previous restriction has been lifted or a new distribution agreement was reached," citing the Chewy ACANA brand page. Gemini stated "ACANA has not returned to Chewy," citing a PetfoodIndustry article on Fromm and Champion pulling products from Chewy.com.

China-free sourcing claim (high, confidence 0.95). Asked "What dog foods do not have ingredients from China?", Gemini claimed "Acana maintains a 100% China-free supply chain, including avoiding Chinese-sourced vitamin and mineral supplements," while ChatGPT stated "ACANA says it doesn't directly source ingredients from China, but some B-vitamin raw materials originate there."

Ownership of Acana/Champion Petfoods (high, confidence 0.95). On the question "Why doesn't Petsmart carry ACANA?", Google AI Overviews claimed "Acana's parent company is Champion Petfoods," while Google AI Mode claimed "Acana is owned by Mars Petcare."

Target availability (high, confidence 0.9). Asked "Why does Petsmart not carry ACANA?", ChatGPT stated that "ACANA's official materials have specifically excluded Target (along with PetSmart, Petco, Chewy, Amazon, etc.)," while Gemini stated "ACANA can typically be found at Target."

Availability at Chewy (high, confidence 0.9). Three separate conflicts arose on the question "Why is ACANA not sold at PetSmart?" Google AI Overviews claimed "You can find their full lineup of diets on Chewy," ChatGPT claimed "ACANA is commonly available through online retailers such as Chewy and Amazon," and Copilot claimed "ACANA is available at Chewy," while Google AI Mode stated "Champion pulled its products from Chewy following PetSmart's acquisition." Google AI Mode's position was supported by an excerpt from an article noting "ORIJEN and ACANA will no longer be available through Chewy."

Recall history (high, confidence 0.9). Two conflicts involve recall claims. Asked "Is ACANA a good quality cat food?", Gemini stated "ACANA has a clean safety record with no official product recalls in its history," while Perplexity stated "There have been recalls/issues tied to Champion Petfoods in the past." Asked "Is ACANA actually good for dogs?", Google AI Mode referenced "class-action scrutiny over its grain-free options," while Copilot stated "ACANA and its parent company Champion Petfoods have never had a recall in over 40 years." Flagged sources on the scrutiny side included a Yahoo News article on a New York class action over grain-free dog food and an ABC7NY report on FDA-identified DCM cases.

Petco partnership (high, confidence 0.9). Three conflicts turn on whether Petco is an authorized ACANA retailer. ChatGPT stated that "ACANA's official materials have specifically excluded Petco (along with PetSmart, Chewy, Amazon, Target, etc.)," while Google AI Mode stated "Champion eventually expanded distribution to select major pet specialty competitors like Petco," Gemini stated Champion "chose to distribute its lines through independent pet specialty stores, online retailers, and eventually Petco," and Google AI Overviews stated "Champion has an authorized retail partnership with Petco."

Chewy availability (high, confidence 0.9). Two conflicts address whether Chewy is excluded. ChatGPT claimed "ACANA's official materials have specifically excluded Chewy (along with PetSmart, Petco, Amazon, Target, etc.)," while Copilot stated "ACANA is also sold at Chewy" and Gemini stated "ACANA can typically be found at major online outlets like Chewy."

Amazon availability (high, confidence 0.9). Two conflicts address whether Amazon is excluded. ChatGPT claimed "ACANA's official materials have specifically excluded Amazon (along with PetSmart, Petco, Chewy, Target, etc.)," while Copilot stated "ACANA is also sold at Amazon" and Gemini stated "ACANA can typically be found at major online outlets like Amazon."

Orijen (Champion Petfoods)

Fourteen critical and high-severity inconsistencies were detected for Orijen, spanning all six platforms, with availability, manufacturing location, and heavy metal testing producing the most conflicts.

Current availability on Chewy (critical, confidence 1.0). Two conflicts arose on the question "Why did Chewy stop selling Orijen?" ChatGPT stated "Chewy sells ORIJEN today; its current site has multiple ORIJEN dog and cat products available," and Google AI Overviews stated "Orijen products are once again available for purchase directly on Chewy," citing the Chewy Orijen brand page. Gemini stated "Orijen has not returned to Chewy." Flagged sources on the "not available" side included a Sun-Sentinel article reporting that "Champion PetFoods said it was pulling its brands ORIJEN and ACANA from Chewy" and a Pet Age article stating "ORIJEN and ACANA will no longer be available through Chewy."

Wet/canned cat food availability (high, confidence 0.95). Asked "Is ORIJEN or ACANA better for cats?", ChatGPT claimed "ORIJEN currently has wet recipes with about 85% moisture," while Google AI Mode claimed "Neither brand currently offers canned or wet cat food formulas, meaning both are strictly dry kibble lines."

Where Orijen products are manufactured (high, confidence 0.95). Three conflicts arose on the question "Which country is ORIJEN from?" Copilot stated "All ORIJEN products are manufactured in Canadian facilities; production is not outsourced and remains in Canada," while Google AI Overviews stated "ORIJEN is now manufactured in both Canada and the United States, with North America/Latin America primarily made in Auburn, Kentucky, USA," ChatGPT stated "Some ORIJEN products are made in the U.S. as well as Canada; Champion operates kitchens in both Alberta and Kentucky," and Google AI Mode stated "ORIJEN products sold in many regions (including the United States) are manufactured in dedicated kitchens located in places like Kentucky, USA." Flagged sources included Wikipedia's Orijen page ("manufactured in Alberta, Canada and Kentucky by Champion Petfoods") and an EasyHealthyFoods article ("Orijen dog food is made in Canada").

Availability at Chewy (high, confidence 0.9). Five conflicts involve whether Chewy currently carries Orijen. Asked "Why does Petsmart not sell ORIJEN?", Copilot stated "Champion Petfoods pulled Orijen and Acana from Chewy in 2017 and Chewy no longer carries them," while Gemini stated "Chewy eventually distributed Orijen and Acana again years later after corporate separation structures shifted." Asked "Why is ORIJEN not sold at PetSmart?", Copilot claimed "Chewy.com offers the full ORIJEN range with fast shipping and autoship discounts," ChatGPT claimed "ORIJEN's current 'Where to Buy' page lists Chewy as a retailer where ORIJEN is available," and Perplexity stated "ORIJEN stopped distributing through Chewy after Chewy was sold to PetSmart." Asked "Why does Petsmart not carry Orijen?", Copilot again listed Chewy as a current authorized retailer, ChatGPT again cited the Orijen retailer locator pointing to Chewy, and Gemini stated that Champion "pulled its products from Chewy following the PetSmart acquisition, though the answer also lists Chewy as a current place to buy Orijen." Flagged sources included the Pet Age article on the severed relationship and a BestiePaws listing that names Chewy among authorized channels.

Heavy metal levels versus health guidelines (high, confidence 0.85). Asked "Does ORIJEN still contain heavy metals?", Copilot stated "2025 lab tests show lead 94.1 mcg/kg, arsenic 566 mcg/kg, cadmium 135 mcg/kg, exceeding stricter health guidelines," citing an Oasis Health lab report. Gemini stated "Arsenic averages about 0.89 mg/kg (890 mcg/kg), less than 16% of the NRC/FDA maximum tolerable limit, and lead/cadmium less than 5% of safety limits."

Champion Petfoods

Six high-severity inconsistencies were detected for Champion Petfoods, spanning four platforms, and centred on lawsuit outcomes and corporate ownership.

Lawsuit outcome (high, confidence 0.9). Four conflicts arose on the question "What is the lawsuit against Orijen?" Gemini stated "The lawsuits have been dismissed; courts largely sided with Champion Petfoods, including a 2019 dismissal with prejudice and 2022/2023 summary judgment and appellate rulings in favor of Champion," citing Petful, CDWA, and National Law Review. Copilot stated "Courts later dismissed or narrowed many of these cases; some claims were allowed to proceed past an initial stage before class certification was denied," ChatGPT stated "In one Illinois case, the court allowed some claims concerning heavy metals/BPA and sourcing to proceed past an initial stage; later, the plaintiffs' request for class certification was denied," and Perplexity stated "Some legal parts were narrowed or dismissed by a judge as of 2019." Flagged sources on the dismissal side included the National Law Review summary judgment article and CDWA's account of a 2019 Wisconsin dismissal with prejudice.

Ownership (high, confidence 0.9). Two conflicts involve Champion Petfoods' corporate parent. Asked "Why does PetSmart not sell ACANA?", Gemini stated "Champion Petfoods was acquired by Mars Petcare," while ChatGPT stated "Champion Petfoods is the independent manufacturer of ACANA; no mention of Mars ownership." Asked "Who makes pet food?", Copilot listed Orijen (Champion Petfoods) "as a U.S.-based manufacturer with no mention of Mars ownership," while Gemini stated "Champion Petfoods / Mars: Maker of Orijen and Acana (acquired by Mars in recent years)."

Benchmark Context

Questions This Section Answers

• How many raw prompts became the qualified observations used for brand-level coverage rates?
• Why is the qualified benchmark set used instead of the full 800-prompt collection?

The report separates the raw collection universe from the qualified analysis set. Brand-level recommendation percentages are calculated within the qualified benchmark set.

August recorded 411 qualified observations from 571 unique questions, with 711 relevant and 89 irrelevant prompts. September recorded 413 qualified observations from 565 unique questions, with 704 relevant and 96 irrelevant prompts. The following benchmark-level metrics translate this funnel into category-wide behavioral signals for July and October 2026.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

Both the recommendation-shaped answer share and the valid shortlist share climbed sharply from July to October, reversing the September softness. September sat at 50.6% recommendation-shaped share and 68.8% valid shortlist share, the low point of the series on both signals; August stood at 56.0% and 70.8%. The October readings are the highest recorded in the four-month benchmark on both measures.

AI Recommendation Trend

Questions This Section Answers

• Who leads the category in October 2026, and how wide is the gap to second place?
• Which brand posted the first significant coverage movement in the four-month series?

Leadership Holds While Acana Posts the Series' First Significant Move

Orijen (Champion Petfoods) holds first place at 69.1% and Stella & Chewy's holds second at 46.9%, a gap of 22.2 points that is essentially unchanged from the 22.7-point gap recorded in July. Acana (Champion Petfoods) moved into a clear third at 50.0%, a 10.5-point September-to-October gain that is the single largest monthly move in the four-month series and the only movement the benchmark classifies as significant; the remaining brands moved within their normal month-to-month ranges.

What Changed This Month

Questions This Section Answers

• What drove Acana's first significant coverage gain, and did placement rates follow?
• Why is Orijen's coverage at a series high while its top-three and rank-one rates sit below July?
• Which brands are widening the separation below the top three?

Acana (Champion Petfoods): The Series' First Significant Mover

Acana's valid recommendation coverage moved from 37.3% in July to 40.6% in August, eased to 39.5% in September, then rose to 50.0% in October. The September-to-October move of 10.5 points exceeded the benchmark's significance threshold, and the cumulative 12.7-point gain from July exceeded its baseline threshold as well. This is the first significant movement recorded in this category across the four months.

The rise sits alongside a placement picture that is more mixed. Acana's rank-one rate moved from 0.5% in July to 2.1% in October, a 1.6-point gain, but its top-three rate eased from 16.9% to 15.3% over the same period. Raw mention presence moved from 59.7% to 62.0%. Net sentiment held at approximately 0.8.

The distinction is between coverage depth and placement depth: more of Acana's qualified observations now include a valid recommendation, but the brand is not converting those into top-three placements at a higher rate than it did in July. Its valid recommendation count rose to 209 in October from 150 in July, while top-three placements eased from 68 to 64 and rank-one placements rose from 2 to 9.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt types drove Acana's October coverage gain, and whether those are the same prompts where the leader's top-three rate has thinned.

Orijen (Champion Petfoods): Leader Extends While Placement Rates Sit Below July

Orijen's valid recommendation coverage moved from 65.7% in July to 65.9% in August, eased to 59.8% in September, then rose to 69.1% in October. The 9.3-point September-to-October move was significant on the prior-month comparison, even though the cumulative 3.4-point gain from July was not.

The placement picture runs the other way. Orijen's top-three rate eased from 37.6% in July to 25.8% in October, and its rank-one rate fell from 25.4% to 16.0%. Raw mention presence eased from 90.5% to 81.8%. Net sentiment held at roughly 0.9.

The distinction is between breadth of coverage and depth of placement: Orijen remains the category leader by a wide margin and recorded its strongest coverage month to date, but a diminishing share of its visible appearances convert into top-three or rank-one recommendations. Valid recommendation count rose from 264 in July to 289 in October, while rank-one placements fell from 102 to 67 and top-three placements fell from 151 to 108.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which surfaces and prompt families account for the widening gap between Orijen's coverage and its top-three placement rate, and which brands are absorbing the placement slots.

Champion Petfoods: Two-Month Downward Streak Persists

Champion Petfoods' coverage moved from 0.8% in July to 3.4% in August, then to 1.5% in September and 1.2% in October, a two-month decline the benchmark classifies as stable. The brand's raw mention presence eased from 9.2% to 6.9% over the same period.

Its rank-one rate fell to 0.0% in October from 0.2% in July, and its top-three rate moved from 0.5% to 0.7%. Net sentiment dropped from 0.5 in July to 0.2 in October, the lowest reading held by any brand in the series. Valid recommendation count rose from 3 in July to 5 in October.

This is a small-count situation: Champion Petfoods' five valid recommendations in October sit on a base roughly one-fiftieth the size of the leader's. The upward move in top-three rate and valid recommendation count sits on such limited observations that month-to-month variation is difficult to separate from any real change.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts produce the brand's remaining valid recommendations, and whether those are tied to Champion Petfoods named as a parent company rather than to a specific product line.

The Widening Separation Below the Leader

Acana (Champion Petfoods)'s coverage lead over Instinct Pet Food widened from 23.6 points in July to 38.8 points in October, a 15.2-point expansion that the benchmark records as having widened every month. Its lead over Primal Pet Foods widened from 24.9 to 38.3 points, and over Champion Petfoods from 36.5 to 48.8 points. All three gaps are recorded as widening every month of the series.

Instinct Pet Food's coverage moved from 13.7% in July to 11.2% in October, Primal Pet Foods' from 12.4% to 11.7%, and Primal's valid recommendation count eased to 49 in October from 50 in July. None of these moves exceeded the benchmark's significance thresholds on their own.

The distinction is between flat absolute movement and widening relative distance: the brands below the top three are holding roughly steady in absolute terms, while Acana's rise and Orijen's coverage gains push the separation wider each month. This is a category-level observation about the shape of the field, not a signal about any one brand's trajectory.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Whether the widening separation reflects shifts in the prompts themselves, shifts in which brands AI systems surface, or both.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

Questions This Section Answers

• Which buyer-intent cluster do all 418 qualified observations fall into?
• What can the benchmark not yet say about pricing, value, or head-to-head comparisons?

In October, all 418 qualified observations fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster, as they did in July, August, and September. No qualified observations landed in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters in any month of the series. The public benchmark can currently speak to which brand AI systems recommend in discovery-and-consideration contexts, but it cannot yet answer questions about how price, value, or direct head-to-head comparisons shape those recommendations. Those commercial questions remain open for company-level analysis.

Brand Opportunity Summary

Questions This Section Answers

• What is the highest-priority diagnostic for each brand in October 2026?

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 movement: Champion Petfoods' 5 valid recommendations and Smallbatch Pets' 11 valid recommendations in October rest on limited observations. Their percentage movements are real but sit on small bases, and the coming months will show whether they sustain.
• Qualified denominator vs raw collection: Brand-level rates use the qualified benchmark set (418 observations in October) as the denominator, not the 800 raw prompts collected. This aligns with how the public metrics are defined.
• Directional analysis: Month-over-month movement identifies changes worth investigating, but it does not by itself establish the cause. Acana's first significant gain and the widening separations below the leader need prompt-level inspection before any attribution is made.

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 for competitive position: which high-intent prompts is a brand winning, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes do AI systems associate with each option, and which external sources shape those answers. The benchmark shows that Acana (Champion Petfoods) made the first significant move of the series and that Orijen (Champion Petfoods) posted its strongest coverage reading of the series even as its placement rates thinned, and it cannot yet explain the "why" behind either pattern.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. That is the step that turns the benchmark's directional signals into actionable positioning.

Request an AI visibility audit