Recent insights from Productrise, a firm specializing in tracking organic product data for Google Shopping, reveal that Google’s AI Mode diverges significantly from the Popular Products carousel in search results.
In many instances, even when common products are displayed, the foremost seller listed frequently differs.
Analysis indicates that merely 1.28% of items featured in the Popular Products carousel concurrently appeared in AI Mode on the same day. Furthermore, among the overlapping products, a staggering 49.6% displayed different leading sellers.
Productrise’s database statistics, which Google has not yet verified according to a communication with Futurism, illustrate a lack of consistent crossover between the carousel and AI Mode, even for identical products searched on the same day.
Tracking Methodology
Between August 9 and August 31, 2026, Productrise analyzed over two million product listings across upwards of 100,000 standard search outcomes and responses from AI Mode.
The study entailed concurrent product-specific searches using both AI Mode and regular search parameters in both the United States and the United Kingdom.
This evaluation focused solely on the Popular Products carousel within the regular search framework, deliberately excluding other results modules.
Conversely, AI Mode encompassed the product listings that were part of the returned answer. Productrise employed Google’s product IDs to correlate products from both perspectives and assessed the leading seller and pricing on each side.
The queries primarily targeted products monitored through their platform and do not represent a random sample of all Google searches.
Minimal Overlap in Product Listings
When identical queries produced results in both AI Mode and the Popular Products carousel, the latter showcased an average of 27.8 products, while AI Mode revealed only 3.9.
AI Mode Shows Fewer Products and Minimal Daily Overlap
Average product counts per query when both result categories yielded products. Popular products carousel: 27.8 average products; AI Mode: 3.9 average products 027.8. Distinct calculation: daily product overlap 1.28% average daily overlap.
Products appearing in both result types for the same query and day, as a share of carousel listings carrying a Google product ID. Daily rates averaged across August 9–31, 2026.
The noted 1.28% overlap figure pertains to a daily calculation. This statistic was determined by dividing the products that appeared in both outputs by the total number of carousel listings featuring a product ID and averaging that rate over the span of 23 days.
Identical Products, Divergent Sellers and Prices
Among the products appearing in both AI Mode and the carousel, the first-listed seller was different in 49.6% of instances.
Furthermore, price discrepancies were observed in 38.1% of matched products, with AI Mode exhibiting the elevated price in 68.4% of those cases.
Identical Products, Differing Offers among products appearing in both result types for the same query and day. Different first-listed seller49.6% Different first-listed price: 38.1%; 0% 100%.
Among matched products where prices differed, 68.4% of the time AI Mode displayed the higher price
This finding pertains solely to matched products with differing first-listed prices, not to all matched products.
When observing all matched products, including those with corresponding prices, AI Mode’s pricing was, on average, 21.6% higher than that of the carousel listings.
Notably, when AI Mode displayed the higher price, the median variance was quantified at 22.2%, while the average difference soared to an imposing 88.5%.
This discrepancy was amplified by outlier comparisons, such as contrasting a used item in the carousel with a new product in AI Mode. Conversely, instances where AI Mode listings bore lower prices showed a median difference of 7.8%.
Users can view a panel containing alternate sellers and their respective prices upon selecting a product from either category, indicating that the first-listed offer is merely a fraction of the available options for that product.
Limitations of the Data
This data encapsulates only the visible listings and omits details regarding clicks or purchases, thus failing to ascertain whether consumers opted for the initially displayed price.
Furthermore, it does not illuminate the reasoning behind the varied product and seller selections between the two result types.
Hugo Huijer, the founder of Productrise, noted that “the cheapest price appears to be a secondary consideration in AI Mode,” according to his analysis of the observed trends.
On September 2, a response from Google was reported by Futurism, stating:
While we haven’t verified the accuracy of the claims in this report, all shopping results on Google Search, including those from AI Mode and the main search results page, are underpinned by the same data source: our Shopping Graph.
Shoppers can effortlessly navigate into product listings to compare prices across retailers and select the most favorable option.
Significance of the Findings
The initially visible merchant in AI Mode could represent a direct competitor, even if the product is ostensibly within the same brand.
The AI performance insights report from Merchant Center, which was discussed in July, provides a comprehensive overview of a brand’s visibility in both AI Mode and AI Overviews, calculated as a percentage of overall impressions in AI.
However, this report does not delineate any specific seller or price metrics, thus lacking details about which seller and price AI Mode associates with a given product.
Future Considerations
Accessing AI Mode requires only a single click during any product search. It appears prominently in the search bar, Chrome’s address field, and as a tab above the search results, consistently performing the same query that was originally entered.
Upon clicking, users are presented with AI Mode’s selected seller and price, which often diverges from what the carousel displays.
Huijer posits that this mechanism might inadvertently benefit brands that cannot compete on price, contingent on the assumption that enhanced feed data increases their likelihood of selection.
While this study does not validate that hypothesis, individuals can assess their own products by comparing the leading listings and prices across both formats.
Source link: Searchenginejournal.com.
