> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://citdhq.com/docs/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Sources

> Inspect the domains and URLs cited in tracked AI responses to understand where authority is coming from.

The **Sources** page shows which websites and individual pages are being cited when AI models generate tracked responses. It is the clearest way to see where authority is flowing — and where it is not.

<Frame caption="Sources page — Domains tab with citation trend chart, source type mix, and domain table">
  <img src="https://mintcdn.com/autonome/WzX-ugIsBIOg_KpO/images/sources.jpg?fit=max&auto=format&n=WzX-ugIsBIOg_KpO&q=85&s=e6414ffc2215e8662c4fa0fadb99d52f" alt="Sources page showing the Domains tab with a citation trend line chart on the left, a source type mix donut chart on the right, and a table of cited domains below" width="1475" height="812" data-path="images/sources.jpg" />
</Frame>

## Why Sources matter

Sources answer the questions that raw visibility numbers cannot:

* Is your own domain being cited, or only competitors?
* Which retailers, publishers, or review sites influence results?
* Are competitors getting cited by domains you never appear on?
* Is the problem broad domain coverage or a few missing key URLs?

If [Authority](/concepts/visibility) is low on the Overview diagnostic row, Sources is usually the next page to open.

## Domains tab

The **Domains** tab rolls source evidence up to the site level. It is the right starting point for most investigations.

It includes:

* a **citation trend** chart showing how often domains were cited over the selected date range
* a **source type mix** chart breaking down citations by category (Editorial, Retailer, UGC, You, and so on)
* a **domain table** with the following columns:

| Column             | Meaning                                                                   |
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Domain Type**    | Whether the source looks like Editorial, Retailer, UGC, or your own store |
| **Retrieved**      | Percent of responses where the domain appeared as a source                |
| **Retrieval Rate** | Average number of source retrievals per retrieved response                |
| **Citation Rate**  | Average number of inline citations per retrieved response                 |

<Tip>
  Sort by **Retrieved** to find the domains with the broadest reach across your tracked prompts. Sort by **Citation Rate** to find the domains that carry the most weight when they do appear.
</Tip>

The source type mix chart is especially useful for spotting when an entire category of source — for example, editorial review sites — is missing from your footprint. A hiking-gear store that is absent from outdoor-lifestyle publications will show a gap in the Editorial slice even if the Retailer slice looks healthy.

## URLs tab

The **URLs** tab drops to page level so you can inspect specific source pages.

Each row shows:

* page title or URL
* detected URL type
* total retrievals
* retrieval rate
* citation rate
* last cited time

Use this view when a domain looks important in the Domains tab and you want to see which exact pages are carrying influence.

## URL details

Opening a URL row shows a lightweight detail view with:

* whether your brand is mentioned on the page
* whether tracked competitors are mentioned on the page
* retrieval and citation metrics for that URL

<Info>
  The current version focuses on citation and mention evidence. It does not yet expose a full crawled page-content view inside the source detail panel.
</Info>

This is especially useful for spotting pages that already mention competitors but not you — those are high-priority targets for outreach, content placement, or product-data updates.

## How to use Sources alongside Analysis

Sources and [Analysis](/features/analysis) work well together:

* use **Sources** to see *where* evidence is coming from (which sites, which pages)
* use **Analysis** to understand *why* missing or weak citation coverage is hurting your Authority, Relevance, or Readiness scores

<Steps>
  <Step title="Check the source type mix">
    Look for missing categories. If Editorial is thin, that is a content-placement gap. If Retailer is thin, your products may not be stocked or reviewed on major platforms.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Sort the domain table by Retrieved">
    Find the domains that appear most broadly. Are you present on them?
  </Step>

  <Step title="Open the URLs tab for important domains">
    For any domain where competitors appear but you do not, check the URL detail to confirm you are absent, then prioritize getting mentioned.
  </Step>

  <Step title="Cross-reference with Analysis">
    If Authority is low, the citation gaps you found in Sources explain it. Go to [Analysis](/features/analysis) for the scored breakdown and recommended fixes.
  </Step>
</Steps>

## Next steps

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Analysis" icon="magnifying-glass" href="/features/analysis">
    Turn citation-gap findings into scored diagnostics and root-cause detail.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Actions" icon="bolt" href="/features/actions">
    Act on citation gaps — content outreach, retailer listings, feed improvements.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Overview" icon="house" href="/features/overview">
    Return to the Overview to see how source changes affect top-line metrics.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Glossary" icon="book-open" href="/glossary">
    Look up terms like Retrieval Rate, Citation Rate, and Authority.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>
