CategoryRank — AI is becoming the new category layer
AI Memory Verdict · Distributor lens · 2026-W19
OEMBrokerDistributorAggregator

AI consolidated + supply thin → hedge

HEDGEHOLDAI ≈ OEM language· cos 0.89partial · missing DIST/AGG/SEARCH
▸ Panel signature · what AI saw, what we compared against
AI: 4 textsOEM: 2DIST: 0AGG: 0SEARCH: 0
cohort disagreement: 14.6%
1024-dimensional centroid embeddings · all numbers reproducible from methodology

Distributor action: fragility in supply but distribution narrative intact · hold position.

usb-connectors· level 2· tier B· leaf· 1,200,000 SKUs measured· 68 observations · 3 vantagesavailable

Where you rank in USB Connectors

10 brands · 2026-W19

For each brand AI associates with this category, we record the rank (by AI-claim count) and which reference frame AI uses when talking about the brand. When the brand ahead of you appears in a different column than your marketing speaks, that's the campaign brief.

Category leaderboard · top 3
#1
jae.com
AI ≈ OEM
n=8
#2
molex.com
AI ≈ OEM
n=6
#3
amphenol.com
AI ≈ OEM
n=5

AI ≈ OEM

10 brands

AI talks about these brands in OEM-side terms.slug cos 0.89

  • #4
    te.com
    n=4
    2/4 vantages
  • #5
    samtec.com
    n=3
    3/4 vantages
  • #3
    amphenol.com
    n=5
    2/4 vantages
  • #2
    molex.com
    n=6
    2/4 vantages
  • #7
    pulseelectronics.com
    n=1
    1/4 vantages
  • #7
    mill-max.com
    n=1
    1/4 vantages

AI ≈ DIST

0 brands

AI talks about these brands in distributor-catalog terms.

No brand AI-anchored to this frame for this category.

AI ≈ AGG

0 brands

AI talks about these brands in aggregator-discovery terms.

No brand AI-anchored to this frame for this category.

AI ≈ SEARCH

0 brands

AI talks about these brands in buyer-search terms.

No brand AI-anchored to this frame for this category.
rank = AI-claim count desc within the category · top 6 brands per reference frame · week 2026-W19
Buyer-search vocabulary · week 2026-W19
source · Google Keyword Planner data

What buyers actually search for — USB Connectors

AI's vocabulary for this category does not currently match buyer-search. These are the buyer queries — the language AI is not yet echoing.

buyer querymonthly searchescompetition
type c usb charger135KHIGH
usb c cables74KHIGH
usb type c to c cable74KHIGH
cable usb to type c74KHIGH
usb c to type c cable74KHIGH
usb to usb type c cable74KHIGH
type c to usb a cable74KHIGH
usb type c to usb type a cable74KHIGH
usb cable to type c74KHIGH
cable type c to usb74KHIGH
ranked desc by monthly searches · seed term dropped (always #1, uninteresting) · top 10 of 10 pulled · total monthly volume shown: 801K
peak: type c usb charger @ 135K searches/month · methodology and full caveats at /methodology
What you unlock

USB Connectors — paid-tier surface

🔒 paid tier
◧33 brands competing here
Per-brand convergence scores, vantage coverage, full sourcing-card drill-down per brand.
◳9 manufacturing facilities · 5 brands · 5 countries
Geographic concentration, top brands by facility count, facility-type mix, supply-risk story.
◤Live week-over-week trajectory
Fragmentation direction, channel-pull attribution, drift narratives.
Anonymous visitors and crawlers see this preview. Sign in or subscribe to unlock the usb-connectors data layer.
Sign in
Public preview · counts only · no brand names, scores, or specific facility data shown
New surface · paid tier
See USB Connectors as a physics field.
Each of the 33 brands competing here becomes a particle, pulled toward the vantages that observed it. The shape of the cloud is the shape of fragmentation.
Open field view →
substrate · 21 weeks · 26.4M AI observations · 35,746 brands · 2025-W51 → 2026-W20
this page · 2026-W19 · numbers reproducible from our weekly substrate (methodology)
per-(brand × vantage × form) aggregation, top-form share within (brand × vantage) cells; divergence classified at category level using a 1024-dimensional embedding centroid.