As artificial intelligence reshapes how people receive information, the question of whose knowledge gets surfaced — and whose gets overlooked — grows more consequential. Microsoft has introduced a feature called Topics Portfolio within Bing Webmaster Tools that allows publishers to see not only where their content appears in AI-generated answers, but where it conspicuously does not. Launched quietly in beta in October 2026, it marks a small but meaningful shift in the ongoing negotiation between human creators and the algorithmic systems that increasingly mediate what the world reads.
Bing Adds Topics Portfolio to AI Performance Tools for Content Gap Analysis
Treat these numbers as directional signals, not a precise ledger
Mark
So this Topics Portfolio thing—it's basically showing you where you're losing to competitors in AI search results?
Mimi
Exactly. It groups queries into topics, shows you where you're cited, then lists queries in those same topics where other sites are cited and you're not. It's a gap analysis tool built into Bing Webmaster Tools.
Luke
But how reliable are the numbers? The source says to treat them as directional signals, not precise.
Mimi
They come as ranges, not exact counts. And the topic labels are AI-generated, so you might disagree with how a query got categorized. It's meant to point you toward opportunities, not give you a ledger.
Mark
What about smaller sites? Do they get useful data?
Mimi
Only if Bing has enough data on your site and enough ecosystem activity in your topics. A niche publisher might see nothing at all.
Luke
So this is really only useful if you already have some citation presence in Bing's AI answers?
Mimi
Right. It's not a discovery tool for new topics. It's a refinement tool for topics where you're already playing.
Mark
When does it leave beta?
Mimi
Microsoft hasn't announced a date. They're collecting feedback through thumbs-up and thumbs-down controls to shape what gets fixed first.
Luke
And the Citation Share metric from June—does that show you your actual percentage of citations?
Mimi
Yes, but without revealing competitor names. It's your share relative to others, not absolute numbers.
Mark
So a content team would use this to decide what to write next?
Mimi
That's the idea. You see a topic where you're cited for some queries but not others, and you know there's demand because Bing's AI is being asked about it. That's your signal to create content.
Le Pouls
- Publishers have long been able to see where AI cites them — but had no way to see the shape of what they were missing, until now.
- Topics Portfolio surfaces 'opportunity queries' where competitors are being cited and a given site is absent, turning invisible gaps into actionable intelligence.
- The feature introduces metrics like Topic Size and Sites Cited, giving content teams a rough map of the competitive AI-citation landscape for the first time.
- Microsoft cautions that the numbers are directional estimates, not precise audits — branded queries can appear as false opportunities, and smaller sites may see little data at all.
- The tool remains in beta with no exit date, and user feedback on individual topics and queries is actively shaping how its AI classification improves.
As artificial intelligence reshapes how people receive information, the question of whose knowledge gets surfaced — and whose gets overlooked — grows more consequential. Microsoft has introduced a feature called Topics Portfolio within Bing Webmaster Tools that allows publishers to see not only where their content appears in AI-generated answers, but where it conspicuously does not. Launched quietly in beta in October 2026, it marks a small but meaningful shift in the ongoing negotiation between human creators and the algorithmic systems that increasingly mediate what the world reads.
Microsoft has added a new capability to Bing Webmaster Tools called Topics Portfolio, a beta feature that gives publishers a structured view of where their content is absent from AI-generated answers — not just where it appears. It lives inside the AI Performance report and works by grouping search queries that cite a site into broader topics, then revealing which queries within those same topics are being answered by competitors instead.
The underlying mechanism relies on what Bing calls grounding queries — the search terms that prompt its AI to pull and cite content through Copilot and related integrations. A content team running a shoe retail site, for example, might discover they're cited for queries about fit and materials, but entirely absent from queries about specific brands — a gap now made visible rather than invisible.
The interface presents each topic with three figures: Topic Size, estimating total citations across all sites; Sites Cited, indicating how many domains appear in that topic; and Queries, counting distinct grounding queries within it. A Top Opportunity Queries section then surfaces the most promising gaps across all topics. Clicking into any topic reveals both where the site already appears and where it doesn't, with citation volumes shown as ranges rather than exact numbers.
This builds meaningfully on a June 2026 update, which introduced topic groupings but only for queries where a site was already cited. Topics Portfolio adds the ecosystem-wide view — total citations, competitor presence, and missing queries — that the earlier version lacked.
The limits are real. AI-generated topic labels don't always match how publishers would categorize their own content, and branded competitor queries can surface as false opportunities. Microsoft is explicit: treat the data as directional signals for planning, not as a precise ledger. Smaller sites with limited citation history may see sparse results or none at all. For content teams willing to work within those constraints, the feature offers something genuinely new — a direct line of sight into what Bing's AI ecosystem is rewarding, and what it's still waiting for someone to answer.
Microsoft has quietly added a new lens to Bing Webmaster Tools that lets publishers see exactly where their content is missing from AI-generated answers. The feature, called Topics Portfolio, arrived in beta within the AI Performance report and does something straightforward but useful: it groups all the search queries that cite your site into broader topics, then shows you which queries in those same topics cite your competitors instead.
The mechanism runs on what Bing calls grounding queries—the search terms that trigger Bing's AI to pull and cite content when generating answers through Copilot, Bing's AI summary feature, and select partner integrations. Until now, publishers could see where they were being cited. Topics Portfolio flips the view: it surfaces the gaps. A content team managing a running shoe site, for instance, might learn that they're cited for queries about shoe materials and fit, but not for queries about running shoe brands—and that other sites are filling that void.
The interface lives in a new tab alongside the existing Citations & Pages section. When you open Topics Portfolio, you see a table of topics where Bing has determined your site has meaningful presence. Each topic comes with three numbers: Topic Size, which estimates total citations across all sites for that topic during your chosen time window; Sites Cited, showing roughly how many different domains appear in that topic; and Queries, the approximate count of distinct grounding queries within it. Below that sits a section called Top Opportunity Queries, which pulls the most promising gaps from across all your topics—queries where competitors are cited but you aren't. The citation volumes here appear as ranges rather than exact figures.
Clicking into a specific topic opens a detail view. You see the topic's overall size, your citation count within it, and the total query count. Two tables follow: one showing queries where your site already appears, the other listing opportunity queries in that same topic, again with citation ranges. You can adjust the time window to one, two, or three months.
This represents a meaningful step forward from Bing's June update. That earlier version introduced topic groupings, but only for queries where your site was already being cited. It had no way to show you the ecosystem-wide picture—how many total citations existed in a topic, how many competitors were playing in that space, or which queries in your topics you were missing entirely. Topics Portfolio adds all three. The June release also introduced Citation Share, a metric showing your percentage of citations for a given query without revealing competitor names. Topics Portfolio builds on that foundation by adding the competitive context at scale.
There are real limits to treat seriously. Because Bing generates topic labels using AI, a query might land under a topic label you wouldn't choose yourself. Branded searches can appear as opportunities—Microsoft's own example was a shoe retailer seeing a competitor's brand name flagged as an opportunity query. The company's guidance is blunt: treat these numbers as directional signals for planning, not as a precise ledger. The data comes in ranges and estimates, designed to show you relative opportunity, not to serve as an audit trail.
Smaller websites may see little or nothing. Bing only displays topics where it has enough data on your site and sufficient ecosystem activity. A niche publisher with limited citations might get a sparse view or no view at all. The feature also remains in beta with no announced exit date. Microsoft is collecting feedback through thumbs-up and thumbs-down controls on each topic and opportunity query, and the company says that feedback shapes which classification and selection issues get fixed first.
For content teams, the practical value is clear: a structured way to find holes in your coverage relative to what AI is actually being asked and what other sites are answering. It's not a replacement for traditional keyword research or competitive analysis, but it's a new signal pointing directly at what Bing's AI ecosystem is rewarding. The question now is whether the data stays directional or whether Microsoft adds precision as the feature matures.
Citations marquantes
Treat the numbers as directional signals for planning, not as a precise ledger.— Microsoft, in guidance on Topics Portfolio limitations
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur Search Engine Journal ↗
Technology