Harpreet flagged something odd in a Google AI Overview and shared it on X, pointing out that the AIO cited four self-serving listicles within its answer, yet the one brand ranking itself #1 in those listicles wasn’t actually mentioned in the AI-generated answer.
He wrote: “Crazy AI Overview. 4 self-serving listicles are cited within the AIO but only one of brands that ranks themselves #1 is mentioned in the answer. ChatFin, Aleph and Pluvo all reinforcing their competitors’ positioning in AI tools.”
Here is the screenshot showing the AI Overview for the query “best ai fp&a software.”
Looking at the screenshot, the AI Overview cites sources like ChatFin, Aleph (getaleph.com), and Pluvo throughout its answer sources that appear to be self-published listicles ranking FP&A software. But instead of surfacing whichever brand each of those listicles ranks as #1, the AI Overview’s actual recommendations lean on a different mix of names Datarails, Planful, Pigment, Anaplan, Vena Solutions, Abacum, and Cube.
This points to an interesting dynamic in how AI Overviews pull from citation sources. A listicle written by a company to promote itself as the #1 pick can still get cited as a source, but the AI Overview isn’t necessarily repeating that company’s self-ranking it may be drawing broader conclusions from the page’s content while ignoring the self-serving positioning baked into it. In this case, ChatFin, Aleph, and Pluvo end up functioning more as data sources reinforcing competitor brands’ positioning, rather than boosting their own.
This is a useful reminder for brands relying on self-published “best of” content as an AI Overview citation strategy getting cited doesn’t guarantee the AI Overview will actually promote your own ranking.
Start the conversation by posting the first comment