CiteWorks Studio

How AI Search Is Recommending WordPress Web Hosting: Monthly Trends

Mark HuntleyBy Mark HuntleyFounder and CEO
11 minutes read

Key Takeaways

  • Hostinger moved into first place at 83.0% recommendation coverage in September 2026, edging SiteGround at 82.0% after trailing in August.
  • WP Engine posted the largest July-to-September gain, rising 14.4 points to 56.2%, while Cloudways and Kinsta also made strong baseline gains.
  • Bluehost climbed to 67.2% and held third place, but its rank-one recommendation rate fell versus July, indicating broader visibility without stronger top placement.
  • Flywheel was the only significant overall decliner, dropping to 3.5%, while Liquid Web also fell month over month and remained well behind the mid-tier group.

Executive Summary

Hostinger holds the largest share of AI recommendation coverage in WordPress Web Hosting for September 2026 at 83.0%, up 5.7 points from 77.3% in August 2026. SiteGround follows closely at 82.0% (up 1.5 points from 80.5%), leaving the two brands separated by a single point at the top of the category. The leadership pair has tightened, with Hostinger taking the top spot it did not hold in August.

The broader story is sustained baseline-to-current growth across the middle tier, with WP Engine posting the largest gain in the category and Bluehost also posting a significant one-month rise. Bluehost's coverage rose 6.8 points to 67.2% in September from 60.4% in August, extending a two-month climb of 6.9 points from 60.3% in July — a significant move both this month and against the baseline. WP Engine rose 3.2 points to 56.2% in September from 53.0% in August (not a significant one-month move), extending a two-month climb of 14.4 points from 41.8% in July, the largest baseline-to-current gain in the category. Kinsta posted a 4.5-point gain to 50.4% from 45.9% (also not significant month-over-month), extending an 11.8-point rise from 38.6% in July. All six brands classified as significant risers against the baseline — Bluehost, Cloudways, Hostinger, Kinsta, SiteGround, and WP Engine — gained ground from the July baseline to September.

At the other end, Flywheel and Liquid Web both posted significant one-month declines in September. Flywheel fell 4.8 points from 8.3% in August to 3.5%, the category's only significant decliner overall. Liquid Web fell 5.5 points from 16.6% to 11.1%, a significant one-month move, but its change against the July baseline remains within normal variation, keeping its overall classification stable. The gap between Flywheel and WP Engine widened every month from July to September, from 34.3 points to 52.7 points.

The category saw significant and mixed movement this month against a comparative baseline in July. Six brands were classified as significant risers, one as a significant decliner, and three remained stable across the July-to-September series.

Each monthly run begins with 800 prompt-surface observations (514 unique questions) across the benchmark's defined AI/search surface universe in September 2026. Of those, 800 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor; 771 were relevant and 29 were irrelevant. The public metrics use the 649 observations that survive both qualification stages. The July 2026 baseline included 600 prompt-surface observations (297 unique questions), of which 587 were relevant and 13 irrelevant, yielding 469 qualified observations. The August 2026 period included 800 prompt-surface observations (523 unique questions), of which 778 were relevant and 22 irrelevant, yielding 626 qualified observations.

AI recommendation trend

valid recommendation coverage, Jul 2026 to Sep 2026

0%25%50%75%100%Jul 2026Aug 2026Sep 2026
  • Hostinger83.0%
  • SiteGround82.0%
  • Bluehost67.2%
  • WP Engine56.2%
  • Cloudways55.9%
  • Kinsta50.4%
  • DreamHost42.1%
  • Liquid Web11.1%
  • Flywheel3.5%
  • GoDaddy3.4%

Key Findings

Signal

September 2026 finding

Category leader

Hostinger leads at 83.0% valid recommendation coverage (75.7% in July 2026), up 7.3 points from baseline

Strongest riser from baseline

WP Engine rose 14.4 points to 56.2% coverage (41.8% in July 2026), a significant move

Second-strongest riser from baseline

Cloudways rose 13.5 points to 55.9% coverage (42.4% in July 2026), a significant move

Sharpest decliner this month

Flywheel fell 4.8 points to 3.5% coverage (8.3% in August 2026), a significant move

Leadership shift

Hostinger moved past SiteGround, 83.0% versus 82.0%, reversing their August standings

Mid-tier consolidation

Kinsta, Cloudways, and WP Engine now hold coverage between 50.4% and 56.2%, above the 42.1% held by DreamHost

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.

Research stage

Jul 2026

Sep 2026

What it represents

Source prompt-surface observations collected

600

800

Total prompt-surface observations gathered across the AI/search surface universe

Unique questions

297

514

Distinct questions represented in the collection

Brand / competitor mentions

600

800

Prompts mentioning at least one tracked brand or competitor

Relevant prompts

587

771

Prompts deemed relevant to the category

Irrelevant prompts

13

29

Prompts deemed irrelevant to the category

Qualified benchmark observations

469

649

Observations surviving all qualification stages (public denominator)

Qualified surface breadth

6

6

AI surface families with at least one qualified observation (ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, AI Overviews, AI Mode)

The August 2026 period was the intermediate month in this series, with 800 prompt-surface observations, 523 unique questions, 626 qualified observations, and a qualified surface breadth of 6. With the qualification stages defined, the following benchmark-wide metrics summarize how the overall AI answer mix shifted between July and September before turning to individual brand standings.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

Metric

Jul 2026

Sep 2026

Change

Qualified observations

469

649

+180

Companies tracked

10

10

No change

Recommendation-shaped answer share

46.3%

50.7%

Up 4.4 points

Valid recommendation shortlist share

78.9%

86.4%

Up 7.5 points

Category leader by coverage

SiteGround (77.0%)

Hostinger (83.0%)

Leader changed

The three-month series shows steady expansion in collection scope and a market shifting toward recommendation-shaped answers. The increase in qualified observations from 469 to 649 reflects more questions and prompts across the same six AI surface families, all of which remained active in every month of the series.

AI Recommendation Trend

The WordPress Web Hosting category shows a leadership handoff at the top and sustained gains across the middle tier. Hostinger now leads SiteGround by 1.0 point, a reversal of the August standings when SiteGround led by 3.2 points. Hostinger's valid recommendation coverage rose to 83.0% in September 2026 from 75.7% in July 2026, while SiteGround reached 82.0% from 77.0% over the same period. The two leaders sit just one point apart, with a broader field of risers closing in below them.

Valid Recommendation Coverage by Brand

Brand

Jul 2026

Sep 2026

Movement

Sep 2026 rank

Bluehost

60.3

67.2

Up 6.9 points

3rd

Cloudways

42.4

55.9

Up 13.5 points

5th

DreamHost

43.5

42.1

Down 1.4 points

7th

Flywheel

7.5

3.5

Down 4.0 points

9th

GoDaddy

2.8

3.4

Up 0.6 points

10th

Hostinger

75.7

83.0

Up 7.3 points

1st

Kinsta

38.6

50.4

Up 11.8 points

6th

Liquid Web

13.9

11.1

Down 2.8 points

8th

SiteGround

77.0

82.0

Up 5.0 points

2nd

WP Engine

41.8

56.2

Up 14.4 points

4th

The category-level change in September combined several significant movements. Six brands posted significant gains from the July baseline, one posted a significant decline, and the leadership position changed hands. The concentration of significant risers, rather than any single brand, drove the new competitive configuration.

What Changed This Month

Hostinger: Significant Rise Moves It Into the Lead

Hostinger's coverage rose 5.7 points to 83.0% in September 2026 from 77.3% in August, a significant move that completed a two-month climb of 7.3 points from 75.7% in July. The gain places Hostinger ahead of SiteGround, reversing their August standings.

The rise is anchored in broad strength across the quality metrics. Its top-three rate reached 66.9% in September, up from 56.5% in July, and its rank-one rate reached 54.7%, up from 43.7% in July. Raw mention presence reached 94.8%, up from 89.8% in July. Its valid recommendation count grew to 539 in September from 355 in July.

The distinction to notice: Hostinger gained both presence and placement quality across the period. The category leader is not merely being mentioned more often; it is being recommended in the top position more than half the time.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which evidence sources and prompt categories are reinforcing Hostinger's rank-one position, and how durable is that advantage across all six AI surfaces?

SiteGround: Significant Rise, But a Leadership Handoff

SiteGround's coverage rose 1.5 points to 82.0% in September 2026 from 80.5% in August, a non-significant prior-month move that still completes a significant 5.0-point climb from 77.0% in July. The brand held the category lead in both July and August before Hostinger moved past it in September.

SiteGround's raw mention presence reached 93.8%, near-universal, while its top-three rate reached 53.9%, up from 49.0% in July. Its rank-one rate stood at 9.7%, down from 13.0% in July. Its valid recommendation count grew to 532 in September from 361 in July.

The distinction to notice: SiteGround's near-universal presence and strong top-three placement are intact, but its rank-one rate has slipped since July while Hostinger's has climbed. The leadership handoff is driven by the top position, not by overall presence.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts are now giving the rank-one recommendation to Hostinger instead of SiteGround, and what evidence sources support that shift?

WP Engine: Strongest Baseline-to-Current Riser

WP Engine's coverage rose 3.2 points to 56.2% in September 2026 from 53.0% in August, a non-significant prior-month move that caps a two-month climb of 14.4 points from 41.8% in July, the largest baseline-to-current gain in the category. The brand moved from 5th in August to 4th in September.

Its raw mention presence reached 66.4%, up from 56.7% in July. Within that expanded presence, its top-three rate dipped to 10.0% from 11.3% in July, and its rank-one rate fell to 1.5% from 2.8% in July, both non-significant. Valid recommendation count grew to 365 in September from 196 in July.

The distinction to notice: WP Engine's rise came from broader coverage and presence, not from improved placement at the top. The brand is winning more recommendation shortlist slots, but its position within those shortlists has not strengthened.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which surface or prompt type is driving WP Engine's coverage expansion, and why is that expansion not translating into stronger top-three placement?

Bluehost: Significant Rise in Coverage, Weaker Rank-One Rate

Bluehost's coverage rose 6.8 points to 67.2% in September 2026 from 60.4% in August, a significant move that extends a two-month climb of 6.9 points from 60.3% in July. The brand holds the clear third position behind the two leaders.

Its top-three rate reached 38.1% in September, up from 29.2% in July, while its rank-one rate fell to 4.9%, down from 8.1% in July — a significant baseline-to-current decline. Raw mention presence dipped 1.8 points to 81.4% from 83.2% in July, and valid recommendation count grew to 436 in September from 283 in July.

The distinction to notice: Bluehost is being recommended in top-three positions more often, but its rank-one rate has fallen significantly since July. The brand is consolidating its position just below the leaders while losing its share of top recommendations.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts previously gave Bluehost the rank-one recommendation, and which competitor is now taking that top spot?

Flywheel: The Significant Decliner

Flywheel's coverage fell 4.8 points to 3.5% in September 2026 from 8.3% in August, a significant move that reverses its modest August gain. The brand now sits at its lowest point in the series, down 4.0 points from 7.5% in July.

Its raw mention presence dropped sharply to 5.5% in September from 13.0% in July, a 7.5-point decline. Its top-three rate fell to 0.9%, and its rank-one rate remained at 0.0%. Valid recommendation count fell to 23 in September from 35 in July.

The distinction to notice: Flywheel's decline is a presence problem, not a placement problem. The brand is appearing in fewer observations altogether, and the small counts mean its percentage movements should be read with caution.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompts are no longer surfacing Flywheel at all, and which competitors are capturing its former mention share?

Liquid Web: Significant Prior-Month Decline

Liquid Web's coverage fell 5.5 points to 11.1% in September 2026 from 16.6% in August, a significant move that leaves the brand below its July level of 13.9%. Its raw mention presence also fell to 15.2% from 18.8% in July.

Its top-three rate slipped to 1.2%, and its rank-one rate declined to a near-zero 0.2%. Valid recommendation count reached 72 in September, up from 65 in July, even as its coverage rate declined against a larger qualified denominator this period.

The distinction to notice: Liquid Web's rate decline is a retreat from the modest gains it posted in August, even though its underlying recommendation count held roughly steady from the July baseline. The gap between Liquid Web and WP Engine widened every month from July to September.

Highest-priority diagnostic: Which prompt categories are no longer producing recommendations for Liquid Web, and is the decline concentrated on a particular AI surface?

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

Buyer-intent cluster

What it captures

Strategic question

Brand Recommendation

Prompts seeking a specific hosting brand as the answer

Which brands do AI systems recommend when a clear recommendation is requested?

Pricing & Value

Prompts focused on cost, pricing plans, and value comparisons

What does the benchmark reveal about how AI systems frame pricing and value?

Multi-Brand Comparison

Prompts asking for direct comparison between two or more brands

How do AI systems structure head-to-head comparisons?

In July, August, and September 2026, the qualified observations fell entirely into the Brand Recommendation cluster. No observations were recorded in the Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison clusters for any month.

This means the public benchmark for WordPress Web Hosting currently tracks which brands AI systems surface when a direct recommendation is requested, and it is a robust signal for that question. The benchmark cannot yet answer commercial questions about how AI systems frame pricing, value, or head-to-head trade-offs. Those questions require a different analysis lens than the current public observation set.

Brand Opportunity Summary

Brand

Sep 2026 coverage

Current signal

Highest-priority diagnostic

Bluehost

67.2%

Significant rise, rank-one rate down

Which prompts shifted away from rank-one recommendations?

Cloudways

55.9%

Significant rise from baseline, stable this month

Which prompts drove the sustained coverage expansion?

DreamHost

42.1%

Stable, flat across the series

What holds it below the rising mid-tier brands?

Flywheel

3.5%

Significant decline, lowest in series

Which prompts stopped surfacing the brand altogether?

GoDaddy

3.4%

Stable, low coverage

Which use cases earn it a recommendation at all?

Hostinger

83.0%

Category leader, significant rise, strong rank-one

How durable is the top position across all surfaces?

Kinsta

50.4%

Significant rise from baseline, crossed 50%

Which prompts drove the sustained coverage growth?

Liquid Web

11.1%

Significant prior-month decline

Which surfaces or prompts drove the retreat?

SiteGround

82.0%

Significant rise, leadership handoff

Why is the rank-one rate slipping while presence stays high?

WP Engine

56.2%

Strongest baseline-to-current rise

Why is coverage growth not improving top-three placement?

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.

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

  • Small-count movement: Some brands, such as Flywheel, GoDaddy, and Liquid Web, operate on small absolute counts of valid recommendations (23, 22, and 72 respectively in September 2026). Their percentage movements should be read with that context in mind.
  • Qualified denominator vs raw collection: Brand-level percentages are calculated against the qualified benchmark set (649 observations in September), not the larger raw collection (800 prompts). This ensures comparability across months and surfaces.
  • Directional analysis: Month-over-month movement identifies changes worth investigating. It does not by itself establish the cause of those changes.

This report is part of the LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery research program. See the AI Industry Market Discovery overview, methodology, metrics, and standards pages for more on how this benchmark is built.

Next Step

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

The aggregate coverage percentage for each brand in September 2026 answers a narrow but critical question: how often do AI systems recommend this brand in WordPress Web Hosting prompts? Beneath that percentage sit the questions that determine the next move: Which high-intent prompts is the brand winning? When a recommendation goes to a competitor, which one? What attributes do AI systems associate with each option? Which external sources are shaping those answers?

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 the benchmark's "what" to the actionable "why," identifying the specific levers that can change a brand's position in the AI recommendation landscape.

Request an AI visibility audit

/ Take the next step

Want to Understand Your AI Citation Footprint?

We start every engagement with a full audit of how AI systems reference your brand today.

Measurable, Repeatable Programme

Build a durable foundation of credible citations that compounds over time and continues to influence AI answers as new queries emerge

Citation Architecture Review

Identify which high-authority community sources are and aren't working in your favour across AI platforms.

AI Visibility Audit

Understand exactly how LLMs are referencing your brand today and which sources are shaping those answers.

/ Learn More

Understanding AI search visibility.

AI search experiences create answers by pulling information from many places online and summarizing it into a single response.

What Is AI Citation Intelligence?
AI citation intelligence is the process of measuring where AI platforms source their information and how frequently a brand is mentioned or referenced in AI-generated responses. Because LLMs synthesize across multiple sources, the sites and brands that appear repeatedly tend to influence how a topic or company is framed. This practice focuses on identifying which sources shape AI outputs and tracking brand visibility across different AI systems.
What Is Citation Architecture?
Citation architecture describes the set of sources that consistently inform how AI systems talk about a brand, product, or topic. LLMs draw from websites, articles, forums, and public discussion, and the sources they rely on most often become the backbone of their answers. Building strong citation architecture means ensuring that accurate, credible, high authority sources are the ones most likely to shape the way AI tools summarize and recommend a brand.
What Is Generative Engine Optimization?
Generative engine optimization (GEO) is the practice of improving the chances that AI systems use and cite your brand or content when generating answers. While traditional SEO is centered on ranking pages in search results, GEO focuses on how LLMs retrieve, interpret, and combine information when responding to a question. The objective is to strengthen the content and sources AI systems rely on, so your brand is treated as a trusted reference in AI responses.
What Is AI Share of Voice?
AI share of voice tracks how often a brand appears in AI-generated answers compared with competitors in the same category. It reflects visibility across AI platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity. Monitoring AI share of voice helps organizations see whether AI systems consistently include and recommend their brand for key queries or whether competitor brands are showing up more often.

About The Author

Mark Huntley

Mark Huntley

Founder and CEO

Mark Huntley, J.D. is founder of CiteWorks Studio, a strategic advisory focused on visibility, authority, and recommendation presence in AI-shaped search environments. His work centers on embedding-level GEO, vector optimization, and cosine gap engineering — helping brands align their digital presence with the retrieval systems that increasingly shape discovery, interpretation, and choice.

VIEW ALL CASE STUDIESREQUEST AN AI VISIBILITY AUDIT