Hotel chains
Which brand 4 AI models pick, with intervals.
Fast panel · Panel, equal weight
- anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 @ claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter (25%)
- openai/gpt-6-luna @ gpt-6-luna via OpenRouter (25%)
- google/gemini-4-argon @ gemini-4-argon via OpenRouter (25%)
- mistralai/mistral-large-4-0 @ mistral-large-4-0 via OpenRouter (25%)
Too closeNo single favourite: Best Western, Choice Hotels, Hilton, Hyatt, IHG Hotels & Resorts, Marriott, and Wyndham Hotels & Resorts share the top tier for these 4 API models.
Tier 1
- Marriott36%95% interval 24%–< 50%plausible rank 1–7
- Hilton28%95% interval 17–41%plausible rank 1–8
- Hyatt26%95% interval 15–39%plausible rank 1–8
- Wyndham Hotels & Resorts26%95% interval 16–37%plausible rank 1–8
- IHG Hotels & Resorts25%95% interval 14–37%plausible rank 1–8
- Best Western24%95% interval 14–36%plausible rank 1–8
- Choice Hotels23%95% interval 13–35%plausible rank 1–8
Tier 2
- Omni Hotels & Resorts15%95% interval 7–26%plausible rank 2–8
Drag across the chart to probe a share.
Measured but left off the chart
- Sonesta: Too many planned scenarios would be left out
- Drury Hotels: Too many planned scenarios would be left out
- Extended Stay America: Too many planned scenarios would be left out
- Red Roof: Too many planned scenarios would be left out
Too closeNo single favourite: Best Western, Choice Hotels, Hilton, Hyatt, IHG Hotels & Resorts, Marriott, and Wyndham Hotels & Resorts share the top tier for these 4 API models.
| Brand | Choice share | 95% interval | Plausible rank | Tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marriott | 36% | 24%–< 50% | 1–7 | Tier 1 |
| Hilton | 28% | 17–41% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| Hyatt | 26% | 15–39% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| Wyndham Hotels & Resorts | 26% | 16–37% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| IHG Hotels & Resorts | 25% | 14–37% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| Best Western | 24% | 14–36% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| Choice Hotels | 23% | 13–35% | 1–8 | Tier 1 |
| Omni Hotels & Resorts | 15% | 7–26% | 2–8 | Tier 2 |
How to read this
- Choice share: how often models pick a brand when it appears in a shortlist of 4. Chance is 25%, the dashed line.
- The band is the 95% interval; the bright tick is the estimate. Overlapping bands are not a strict order.
- Tiers are published: a tier groups brands not distinguishable from that tier's leader. Same tier does not mean equal.
- Rank shows the plausible rank range, not a strict place.
- Drag across the chart to probe a share and see which intervals contain it.
- Brand names only: the models saw each option as a brand name, with no product facts, and answered from their own knowledge.
- Fast panel: the fast or small current models of each vendor, not the full flagship panel.
- Beta: intervals are not yet small-sample calibrated.
- Each page shows the latest edition. Dates are in the downloadable JSON.
Panel and conditions
Each edition puts the brands of the category to a panel of AI models, called through their APIs, in randomized shortlists of 4 (chance is 25%). Each option was a brand name only, with no product facts, prices or any commercial data, so a brand's share measures which brand the models recommend from their own knowledge for the shopper needs of the scenarios. Shares come with 95% intervals; tiers and rank intervals are simultaneous at the same level.
- anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 @ claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter (25%)
- openai/gpt-6-luna @ gpt-6-luna via OpenRouter (25%)
- google/gemini-4-argon @ gemini-4-argon via OpenRouter (25%)
- mistralai/mistral-large-4-0 @ mistral-large-4-0 via OpenRouter (25%)
Conditions: closed-book API calls via OpenRouter (pinned providers); web search, grounding, tools and retrieval off; forced choice; 2 paraphrases per scenario in English.
Methodology: ACM-1.0-chart-draft (draft rules for movement, significance and events, awaiting review).