AI Consensus Fit Review

Medical Guardian for Budget-Friendly Emergency Response - AI Consensus Fit Review

Medical Guardian is a good but not best-in-class fit for Budget-Friendly Emergency Response.

Situation-specific fit reviewA focused review of how this provider fits the needs addressed by this research category.
Built for careful comparisonSee the strengths, limitations, pricing considerations, and questions worth investigating before you decide.
Medical Guardian for Budget-Friendly Emergency Response hero image
medical-alert-systemsPublished by Aging in Place Index to support informed aging-in-place decisions.

Answer Capsule

Medical Guardian is a good but not best-in-class fit for Budget-Friendly Emergency Response. Four of seven AI platforms named Medical Guardian during the ranking stage (57% platform share), with an average listed rank of 3.0 and a best rank of 1. The strongest reason to consider it is the combination of 24/7 U.S.-based professional monitoring, no long-term multi-year contracts, and a relatively low-cost landline entry plan (MGClassic) starting around $27.95–$31.95 per month. The main limitation is the total cost structure: upfront equipment fees of approximately $149.95–$199.95, a $10/month fall-detection add-on, a 90-day minimum commitment, and cancellation processing that can take up to 30 days. Fit ratings were mixed across platforms: three rated it "good," two "mixed," one "weak," and one "uncertain."

Research Snapshot

MetricValue
Platform mentions in ranking stage4 of 7 platforms (anthropic, deepseek, openai, perplexity)
Share of included platform responses57.1%
Average listed rank3.0
Best listed rank1 (deepseek, perplexity)
Relevant product/model/planMGClassic (landline) or MGHome Cellular for basic in-home protection; Mobile 2.0 for on-the-go
Overall use-case fitGood (3 platforms), Mixed (2), Weak (1), Uncertain (1)
Research date2026-08-06

Why Medical Guardian Qualified for This Study

Medical Guardian qualified for the Budget-Friendly Emergency Response category because it met the core screening criteria used by the AI platforms during the ranking stage. The company offers monitored emergency response with monthly monitoring fees in the $27.95–$46.95 range, no conventional long-term multi-year contracts, and both landline and cellular in-home options. Four platforms (anthropic, deepseek, openai, perplexity) named Medical Guardian during ranking discovery, placing it among the finalists for this use case. The remaining three platforms (google, grok, kimi) evaluated Medical Guardian's fit during the research stage even though they did not name it in the ranking stage.

Medical Guardian's candidacy was driven primarily by its entry-level pricing. Independent 2026 pricing data from SafeWise and Forbes lists basic in-home monitoring at approximately $31.95 per month for landline service and $38.95 per month for cellular service when billed monthly, with annual billing lowering effective rates to approximately $27.95 and $34.95 per month respectively [1]. SeniorLiving.org and U.S. News report a broader range of $27.95–$46.95 per month depending on system type and billing cycle [3].

The company's no-long-term-contract positioning was a second qualifying factor. Multiple independent sources confirm Medical Guardian does not require multi-year service agreements [5]. The company's own service agreement states that unused prepaid monitoring beyond the minimum three months is refunded [7].

The Product, Model, Plan, or Service Most Relevant to Budget-Friendly Emergency Response

The most relevant product for this use case is the MGClassic landline system (also referenced as MGHome Landline or Active Guardian in some sources) for buyers who have an existing landline, and the MGHome Cellular system for homes without a landline. These are the two basic in-home monitored plans that anchor Medical Guardian's budget positioning.

Platforms recommended the following specific products:

PlatformRecommended Product/Plan
anthropicMGHome Landline (Active Guardian); MGHome Cellular (Home Guardian); Mobile 2.0; MGClassic; Standard Plan
deepseekHome Guardian (cellular) or Active Guardian (landline) – basic in-home plan
googleMGClassic / MGHome Landline
grokMGHome Landline ($31.95/mo) or MGHome Cellular ($38.95/mo)
kimiHome Guardian (cellular), Active Guardian (landline), MGClassic, Mobile 2.0
openaiMGClassic or MGHome Cellular for basic in-home protection; Mobile 2.0 for away-from-home
perplexityUnclear from verified sources

Important naming conflict: The supplied evidence contains inconsistent product terminology. Some sources reference "Active Guardian," "Home Guardian," "Mobile 2.0," and "Standard Plan," while current public pages more prominently use "MGHome Cellular," "MGHome Landline," "MGClassic," and newer mobile-device names. OpenAI explicitly flagged that the current availability, exact pricing, and terminology for Active Guardian, Home Guardian, Mobile 2.0, and Standard Plan are not consistently verifiable from current public pages [8]. Buyers should confirm which exact current model is being sold before ordering.

What the AI Platforms Agreed About

Strong agreement: Medical Guardian offers no long-term multi-year contracts. Five platforms (anthropic, deepseek, google, grok, openai) confirmed that Medical Guardian does not require multi-year service agreements. The company offers month-to-month, quarterly, and annual billing options [11]. However, this flexibility is qualified by a 90-day minimum commitment, discussed below.

Strong agreement: Fall detection costs an additional $10 per month. Five platforms (anthropic, deepseek, google, grok, openai) independently reported the same $10/month fall-detection add-on fee. Medical Guardian's official product pages list automatic fall detection at $10 per month for relevant in-home and mobile systems [13]. This fee is not included in the base price.

Strong agreement: Upfront equipment fees apply. Five platforms (anthropic, deepseek, google, grok, openai) reported equipment charges. The most commonly cited figure is $149.95 for in-home and standard mobile devices, with the MGMove smartwatch adding $199.95 [16]. Some sources report equipment charges up to approximately $199.95 depending on the device [18]. Grok reported the same $149.95 equipment fee for home systems [21].

Strong agreement: Base monthly pricing is approximately $27.95–$38.95. The platforms converged on a narrow pricing band for basic in-home plans:

Billing CycleLandline (MGClassic)Cellular (MGHome Cellular)
Monthly~$31.95~$38.95
Quarterly~$29.95~$36.95
Annual~$27.95~$34.95

These figures come from independent 2026 pricing data [18]. DeepSeek reported a slightly wider range of $29.99–$39.99 per month [25].

Majority agreement: Response reliability is a strength. Three platforms (anthropic, google, openai) cited Medical Guardian's 24/7 U.S.-based monitoring as a positive factor. Anthropic cited independent testing showing average response times of 23–52 seconds, with one test averaging 52 seconds and emergency sound activation within 5 seconds for fall detection [26]. NCOA testers gave call center staff 10/10 customer service ratings [27]. OpenAI noted that independent reviewers report strong response performance, but public evidence does not establish a universal response-time guarantee [28]. Kimi noted TMA Five Diamond certification for monitoring centers [30].

Where the AI Platforms Disagreed or Were Uncertain

Fit rating disagreement. The seven platforms split into four different fit ratings:

PlatformFit Rating
anthropicGood
grokGood
openaiGood
deepseekMixed
googleMixed
kimiWeak
perplexityUncertain

The "good" ratings emphasized monitoring reliability, contract flexibility, and competitive entry pricing. The "mixed" ratings focused on equipment fees and higher monthly costs versus dedicated budget competitors. Kimi rated Medical Guardian "weak," arguing that competitors like CareAlert ($8.95/month family monitoring) and Cove (~$11/month effective monitoring) undercut Medical Guardian's pricing significantly [31]. Perplexity rated the fit "uncertain" because its available evidence did not verify current pricing, equipment fees, or cancellation terms [34].

Equipment fee conflict. The company's website states "no equipment fees" in some marketing language, while independent sources uniformly report $149.95–$199.95 upfront fees. Anthropic flagged this as a company marketing distinction: "no monthly equipment fee" versus an actual one-time upfront hardware cost (anthropic:factual_conflicts). The company's buyer's guide and FAQ do not clearly resolve whether the $149.95 fee applies to all customers or only certain promotions.

Cancellation policy conflict. Medical Guardian's marketing materials emphasize flexible billing and prorated refunds, while its current FAQ states a 90-day minimum commitment and possible restocking fees [35]. Anthropic reported a $50 restocking fee if canceling before the end of the 90-day minimum or upon equipment return, and a $350 non-return penalty if leased equipment is not returned within 30 days of cancellation [38]. U.S. News testing described the cancellation process as "frustrating and overly time-consuming," involving 30-minute wait times and multiple call transfers [40].

Fall detection performance uncertainty. Medical Guardian's official materials state that fall detection does not detect 100% of falls [41]. SeniorLiving.org testing found that fall speed dramatically affected detection results—"fast" falls were far more likely to be detected than slow falls [45]. This is a factual limitation, not a guarantee failure, but it matters for buyers who assume fall detection is comprehensive.

Product naming inconsistency. As noted above, the exact current model lineup is unclear. Sources reference "Active Guardian," "Home Guardian," "Mobile 2.0," "MGClassic," "MGHome Landline," "MGHome Cellular," "MGMini," "MGMini Lite," and "MGMove." Anthropic noted that product naming is inconsistent across sources and unclear which is the current 2026 model lineup (anthropic:factual_conflicts).

Use-Case-Specific Features and Capabilities

Monthly monitoring fee (neutral assessment). Medical Guardian's basic in-home plans are competitively priced within the budget category but not the cheapest available. The landline entry plan at $27.95–$31.95/month is positioned above Bay Alarm Medical's $25.95/month starting price [46] but below premium options like Life Alert at $49.95/month [47]. DeepSeek noted that some budget competitors offer plans under $20/month [48].

Upfront equipment cost (limitation). The $149.95–$199.95 equipment fee is a meaningful barrier for budget-constrained buyers. Anthropic noted that competitors like Bay Alarm Medical may offer lower equipment costs (anthropic:better_alternative_when). Kimi noted that some competitors offer free equipment with activation (kimi:limitations).

Contract and cancellation flexibility (mixed assessment). Medical Guardian offers no long-term contracts, which is a genuine advantage. However, the 90-day minimum commitment, $50 restocking fee, $350 non-return penalty, and up-to-30-day cancellation processing create friction. The company's own FAQ states: "Any unused portion of the prepaid monitoring beyond the minimum three months, minus a restocking fee of up to $50, will be returned" [49].

Fall-detection cost (limitation). At $10/month, fall detection adds $120/year to the total cost. This pushes the effective monthly cost to $37.95–$41.95 for landline service or $44.95–$48.95 for cellular service. Anthropic noted this pushes beyond the ultra-budget segment (anthropic:limitations).

Response reliability (advantage). Medical Guardian operates 24/7 U.S.-based monitoring centers. Independent testing reported average response times of 23–52 seconds [50]. The company is TMA Five Diamond certified [51]. However, no source establishes a universal response-time guarantee for every location, device, network condition, or incident [52].

Connectivity and in-home usefulness (advantage). MGClassic is landline-based with base-station two-way communication; the wearable button itself is not a two-way voice device [53]. MGHome Cellular uses a 4G cellular connection and does not require a landline [54]. Wearable and wall buttons connect to the monitoring center within approximately 1,400 feet of the main plug-in base unit [55]. Most devices are water-resistant, enabling use in showers [56].

Mobile coverage limitation. Cellular systems require strong AT&T or Verizon coverage [57]. In areas with poor reception, mobile options may not be reliable. Only one system—the MGHome Landline—requires a landline connection; all other systems use AT&T's nationwide cellular network [58].

Pricing, Fees, Contracts, and Ongoing Costs

Base monitoring fees (moderate-to-high confidence):

SystemMonthly BillingQuarterly BillingAnnual Billing
MGClassic (landline)~$31.95/mo~$29.95/mo~$27.95/mo
MGHome Cellular~$38.95/mo~$36.95/mo~$34.95/mo
Mobile/GPS plans~$39.95–$49.95/moVariesVaries

Sources: openai:C1, openai:C2, anthropic:C1, anthropic:C2, grok:C1, kimi:known_costs

Equipment fees: $149.95 for in-home and standard mobile devices; $199.95 for MGMove smartwatch [59]. Some sources report equipment charges up to approximately $199.95 depending on the device [61].

Shipping: $12.50 unless paying annually, which includes free shipping [60]. Grok reported a possible shipping fee of $24.95 unless bundled with longer-term plans (grok:additional_fees).

Fall detection: $10/month add-on (all platforms).

Other add-ons:

  • Wall-mounted buttons: $2.99/month [62]
  • Voice-activated button: $4.99–$5/month [62]
  • Lockbox: $2.99/month (free with annual subscription) [62]
  • Protection Plan: $6.99/month (covers accidental damage, loss, theft) [62]

Contract terms:

  • No long-term multi-year contracts
  • 90-day minimum service commitment [64]
  • Cancellation after 90 days with prorated refunds, minus $50 restocking fee if equipment was leased [64]
  • Up to 30 days to fully process cancellation [66]
  • $350 non-return penalty for leased equipment not returned within 30 days [59]
  • 30-day money-back guarantee on equipment for new customers (anthropic:contract_terms)

Pricing confidence: Moderate to high. The platforms converged on similar figures, but promotional pricing rotates frequently, and the company's "no equipment fees" marketing language conflicts with reported $149.95–$199.95 upfront charges.

Best Suited For

Medical Guardian is best suited for:

  • Budget-conscious buyers who value established professional monitoring over absolute lowest price. Three platforms rated Medical Guardian "good" for this use case, emphasizing that the company provides 24/7 U.S.-based monitoring with strong response ratings (anthropic, google, openai).

  • Seniors with an existing landline who want the lowest-cost monitored option. The MGClassic landline plan at $27.95–$31.95/month is Medical Guardian's most budget-friendly offering (google:best_considered_for, openai:best_considered_for).

  • Buyers who want flexible billing without multi-year contracts. Month-to-month, quarterly, and annual billing options are available, with no activation fees when ordering online [67].

  • Seniors without a landline who need cellular in-home protection. MGHome Cellular provides 4G connectivity without requiring a landline [69].

  • Caregivers who want optional fall detection and caregiver-app or portal features. Fall detection is clearly priced at $10/month, and caregiver management features are available on applicable systems (openai:best_considered_for).

Probably Not Best Suited For

Medical Guardian is probably not the best fit for:

  • Buyers seeking the lowest possible total first-year cost. The $149.95–$199.95 equipment fee plus $10/month fall detection pushes total first-year costs above dedicated budget competitors. Kimi rated Medical Guardian "weak" for this reason, noting competitors like CareAlert and Cove offer substantially lower ongoing costs (kimi:final_verdict).

  • Buyers with strict sub-$25/month budgets. Bay Alarm Medical starts at $25.95/month, undercutting Medical Guardian's $27.95–$31.95 entry pricing [70].

  • Seniors who require fall detection included in the base price. Medical Guardian charges $10/month extra for fall detection, and the company itself states it does not detect 100% of falls [71].

  • Buyers needing immediate month-to-month cancellation with no minimum. The 90-day minimum commitment and up-to-30-day cancellation processing create friction [72].

  • Seniors unable to afford upfront equipment fees. The $149.95–$199.95 equipment charge is a barrier that some competitors waive (anthropic:probably_not_best_for).

  • Users who need budget-friendly mobile GPS protection. Mobile plans run $39.95–$49.95/month, placing them outside the budget tier (kimi:known_costs).

When Another Option May Be Better

The platforms identified specific scenarios where competitors may be a better choice:

  • When minimizing first-year and recurring cost is the primary objective: Choose a lower-cost competitor with comparable monitoring and no sizable equipment charge (openai:better_alternative_when). Bay Alarm Medical offers lower base pricing at $25.95/month [74].

  • When the buyer is likely to cancel within the first year: Choose a provider with included equipment or clearer cancellation language (openai:better_alternative_when).

  • When fall detection is essential and the $10/month fee would make Medical Guardian unaffordable: Choose a system with fall detection included in the base price (openai:better_alternative_when).

  • When the buyer needs sub-$20/month professional monitoring: Consider Cove (~$11/month effective) or promotional pricing from other providers (kimi:better_alternative_when).

  • When family/friends can respond and professional monitoring is not required: CareAlert SIM-only at $8.95/month or $0 with BYO SIM eliminates monitoring fees entirely (kimi:better_alternative_when).

  • When the senior routinely leaves home and wants simpler GPS coverage or longer battery life: Choose a mobile-first competitor (openai:better_alternative_when).

  • When the buyer needs immediate month-to-month cancellation with no minimum: Choose a provider without 90-day commitments (anthropic:better_alternative_when).

Questions to Verify Before Buying

Before purchasing Medical Guardian for budget-friendly emergency response, verify the following with the company directly:

  1. Which exact current model is being sold? Confirm whether it is MGClassic, MGHome Landline, MGHome Cellular, Mobile 2.0, or another device. Product naming is inconsistent across sources (openai:questions_to_verify).

  2. Is the equipment purchased or leased, and what exact charge applies today? The company's "no equipment fees" marketing language conflicts with reported $149.95–$199.95 upfront charges (anthropic:questions_to_verify).

  3. What is the complete first-year cost? Include equipment, shipping, taxes, fall detection, accessories, and protection-plan options (openai:questions_to_verify).

  4. Does the order carry the current 90-day minimum commitment? Confirm how it is applied if service is canceled early (openai:questions_to_verify).

  5. What is the exact cancellation procedure? Confirm when billing stops: on the call date, return-shipment date, warehouse receipt date, or signed-letter date (openai:questions_to_verify).

  6. Are restocking fees or promotional-discount clawbacks applicable? The $50 restocking fee and potential forfeiture of promotional discounts within 12 months need clarification [75].

  7. What charge applies if the device is lost, damaged, or not returned? The reported maximum is $350 [76].

  8. Which cellular network does the device use at the senior's address? Cellular systems require strong AT&T or Verizon coverage [77].

  9. Is fall detection included, and what device must be worn for it to work? Confirm the $10/month fee and testing procedure without creating an emergency dispatch (openai:questions_to_verify).

  10. What is the expected battery life, charging routine, and backup-power duration? This affects real-world reliability (openai:questions_to_verify).

  11. Are monitoring-center response times measured independently? No source establishes a universal response-time guarantee [78].

  12. Can caregivers receive alerts through the app or portal? Confirm whether there are fees for additional users or accessories (openai:questions_to_verify).

Final AI Consensus Verdict

Medical Guardian is a good fit for budget-friendly emergency response when the buyer prioritizes established professional monitoring, flexible billing, and a choice between landline and cellular in-home protection. The MGClassic landline plan at approximately $27.95–$31.95/month is a legitimate budget option where a landline exists, and the MGHome Cellular plan serves homes without a landline.

However, the fit becomes mixed to weak when the full cost structure is considered. The $149.95–$199.95 equipment fee, $10/month fall-detection add-on, 90-day minimum commitment, $50 restocking fee, and up-to-30-day cancellation processing collectively make Medical Guardian less budget-friendly than dedicated low-cost competitors. Three platforms rated the fit "good," two rated it "mixed," one rated it "weak," and one rated it "uncertain."

The AI consensus is that Medical Guardian is a reasonable choice for budget-conscious seniors who value monitoring reliability and contract flexibility over absolute lowest cost, but it is not the best choice for the most price-constrained buyers. Buyers should obtain a written, model-specific total-cost and cancellation quote before purchasing, and compare total first-year costs (equipment + shipping + 12 months monitoring + fall detection if needed) against competitors like Bay Alarm Medical, MobileHelp, and CareAlert.

For a broader comparison of affordable options, see the Budget-Friendly Emergency Response consensus index. You can also browse the full medical alert systems category directory for other use-case reviews.

How This Review Was Produced

This review was produced by aggregating fit-assessment responses from seven AI platforms (anthropic, deepseek, google, grok, kimi, openai, perplexity) that evaluated Medical Guardian against the Budget-Friendly Emergency Response criteria: monthly monitoring fee, upfront equipment cost, lack of long-term contracts, fall-detection add-on fee, cancellation flexibility, and response reliability. Each platform supplied its own research citations, pricing data, and fit assessment. The ranking statistics reflect which platforms named Medical Guardian during the ranking discovery stage (4 of 7 platforms), and the fit ratings reflect each platform's independent assessment.

The research date for this study is 2026-08-06. All platforms except deepseek reported research dates of 2026-08-06; deepseek reported 2026-04-09.

Methodology Limitations

  • Platform-reported dates differ. DeepSeek's research date (2026-04-09) predates the authoritative run date (2026-08-06) by approximately four months. Pricing and terms may have changed in that interval.

  • Platform mentions vs. fit evaluations. All seven platforms evaluated Medical Guardian's fit, but only four platforms (anthropic, deepseek, openai, perplexity) named Medical Guardian during the ranking discovery stage. The remaining three platforms (google, grok, kimi) evaluated fit without ranking the entity.

  • Product naming conflicts unresolved. The evidence contains inconsistent product terminology (Active Guardian vs. MGClassic vs. MGHome Landline; Home Guardian vs. MGHome Cellular; Mobile 2.0 vs. MGMini). This review describes the conflict rather than resolving it by guessing.

  • Pricing conflicts unresolved. Independent sources disagree on whether equipment is purchased, leased, or included for particular models. Promotional offers may change checkout prices. The company's "no equipment fees" marketing language conflicts with reported $149.95–$199.95 upfront charges.

  • URLs not independently validated. The supplied URLs were collected from platform responses and were not independently validated by the writer stage.

  • No independent testing performed. This review does not claim personal testing, customer experience, medical benefit, guaranteed performance, or independent verification beyond what the supplied sources state.

  • AI agreement does not prove quality. Agreement among AI platforms reflects convergence on the supplied evidence, not independent verification of product performance.

  • Fall detection limitations. Medical Guardian's official materials state fall detection does not detect 100% of falls. No source supports a safety guarantee.

Sources

Independent sources:

  • SafeWise – Medical Guardian Review 2026: https://www.safewise.com/senior-safety/medical-alerts/medical-guardian/ (openai:C1, openai:C13, anthropic:C21, anthropic:C24)
  • Forbes Health – Medical Guardian Review: https://www.forbes.com/health/medical-alert-systems/medical-guardian-active-guardian-review/ (openai:C2, anthropic:C19)
  • NCOA – Medical Guardian Review 2026: https://www.ncoa.org/product-resources/medical-alert-systems/medical-guardian-review/ (openai:C3, openai:C12, anthropic:C5, anthropic:C9, grok:C1)
  • MedicalAlert.org – Medical Guardian Review: https://www.medicalalert.org/best-medical-alert-systems/medical-guardian/ (openai:C18)
  • SeniorLiving.org – Medical Guardian Cost & Pricing in 2026: https://www.seniorliving.org/medical-alert-systems/medical-guardian/ (anthropic:C1, anthropic:C13, anthropic:C15, anthropic:C22)
  • U.S. News – Medical Guardian Review 2026: https://realestate.usnews.com/home-services/medical-alert-system/medical-guardian (anthropic:C2, anthropic:C4, anthropic:C7, anthropic:C8, anthropic:C14)
  • RetirementLiving.com – Medical Guardian Review: https://www.retirementliving.com/reviews/medical-guardian-alert-systems (anthropic:C3, anthropic:C18, anthropic:C20)
  • NCOA – Best Medical Alert Systems with Fall Detection: https://www.ncoa.org/product-resources/medical-alert-systems/best-medical-alert-systems-with-fall-detection/ (anthropic:C11, anthropic:C12)
  • MedicalAlertReview.com – Medical Guardian Review 2026: https://medicalalertreview.com/medical-guardian-review (anthropic:C23)
  • SafeHome.org – Medical Guardian Cost, Pricing, Packages & Monthly Plans (google:1.1.2)
  • TheSeniorList.com – Medical Guardian Costs, Our Hands-On Analysis (google:1.1.5)
  • CNET – How to Professionally Monitor Your Home for Less Than $20: https://www.cnet.com/home/security/professionally-monitor-your-home-for-less-than-20/ (kimi:C1)
  • SecuritySystemsReview.com – Cove Review 2026: https://www.securitysystemsreview.com/reviews/cove/ (kimi:C2)
  • SafeWise – Cove Security System Review 2026: https://www.safewise.com/home-security-systems/cove/ (kimi:C6)
  • Qubit.Capital – Assess Product-Market Fit Framework (perplexity:C1)
  • DealHub.io – What Is Feature-Based Pricing? (perplexity:C2)
  • Additional AI research evidence78 records
    1. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    2. AI research evidence record openai:c2
    3. AI research evidence record anthropic:c1
    4. AI research evidence record anthropic:c2
    5. AI research evidence record anthropic:c4
    6. AI research evidence record anthropic:c5
    7. AI research evidence record anthropic:c6
    8. AI research evidence record openai:c14
    9. AI research evidence record openai:c17
    10. AI research evidence record openai:c18
    11. AI research evidence record google:1.1.8
    12. AI research evidence record openai:c7
    13. AI research evidence record openai:c8
    14. AI research evidence record openai:c9
    15. AI research evidence record openai:c10
    16. AI research evidence record anthropic:c7
    17. AI research evidence record anthropic:c8
    18. AI research evidence record openai:c1
    19. AI research evidence record openai:c3
    20. AI research evidence record openai:c4
    21. AI research evidence record grok:c1
    22. AI research evidence record openai:c2
    23. AI research evidence record anthropic:c1
    24. AI research evidence record anthropic:c2
    25. AI research evidence record deepseek:c2
    26. AI research evidence record anthropic:c11
    27. AI research evidence record anthropic:c12
    28. AI research evidence record openai:c12
    29. AI research evidence record openai:c13
    30. AI research evidence record kimi:c3
    31. AI research evidence record kimi:c4
    32. AI research evidence record kimi:c5
    33. AI research evidence record kimi:c2
    34. AI research evidence record perplexity:c1
    35. AI research evidence record openai:c5
    36. AI research evidence record openai:c6
    37. AI research evidence record openai:c7
    38. AI research evidence record anthropic:c16
    39. AI research evidence record anthropic:c7
    40. AI research evidence record anthropic:c14
    41. AI research evidence record openai:c8
    42. AI research evidence record openai:c9
    43. AI research evidence record openai:c10
    44. AI research evidence record anthropic:c10
    45. AI research evidence record anthropic:c13
    46. AI research evidence record anthropic:c24
    47. AI research evidence record anthropic:c23
    48. AI research evidence record deepseek:c2
    49. AI research evidence record anthropic:c16
    50. AI research evidence record anthropic:c11
    51. AI research evidence record kimi:c3
    52. AI research evidence record openai:c13
    53. AI research evidence record openai:c14
    54. AI research evidence record openai:c15
    55. AI research evidence record anthropic:c21
    56. AI research evidence record anthropic:c17
    57. AI research evidence record anthropic:c22
    58. AI research evidence record anthropic:c20
    59. AI research evidence record anthropic:c7
    60. AI research evidence record anthropic:c8
    61. AI research evidence record openai:c4
    62. AI research evidence record anthropic:c19
    63. AI research evidence record openai:c16
    64. AI research evidence record anthropic:c16
    65. AI research evidence record openai:c5
    66. AI research evidence record anthropic:c14
    67. AI research evidence record anthropic:c3
    68. AI research evidence record google:1.1.8
    69. AI research evidence record openai:c15
    70. AI research evidence record anthropic:c24
    71. AI research evidence record openai:c8
    72. AI research evidence record anthropic:c14
    73. AI research evidence record anthropic:c16
    74. AI research evidence record anthropic:c24
    75. AI research evidence record anthropic:c16
    76. AI research evidence record anthropic:c7
    77. AI research evidence record anthropic:c22
    78. AI research evidence record openai:c13

Company-owned sources:

Verify this research

Review the study details behind this page or download the public machine-readable verification record.

Study date
Aug 6, 2026
Platforms analyzed
7
Source records
37
Ranking mentions
4 of 7
Platform share
57%
Final consensus rank
#3

Research trail and source mix

Platforms

openai, anthropic, deepseek, grok, perplexity, kimi, google

Source mix

21 independent · 16 company-owned

Evidence support

31 direct · 6 partial

Important limitation

Use the run research_date as the study date. Platform-reported dates are provenance metadata and do not independently prove freshness.

Source snapshot SHA-256 9cc09714dc94c8674362424a57bad67b71171c6d36215c07595e07fbee9f8558