Google AI Mode shows same products 21.6% more expensive than traditional search
Google AI Mode shows same products 21.6% more expensive than traditional search
谷歌 AI 模式显示的同款产品价格比传统搜索贵 21.6%
Over 23 days (August 9 to 31, 2026), we tracked more than 2 million product listings across more than 100,000 SERPs and AI Mode responses. We ran the same shopping queries through both Google AI Mode and traditional search on the same day at the same moment. When the exact same product showed up on both, the price in AI Mode was 21.6% higher on average. 在 23 天的时间里（2026 年 8 月 9 日至 31 日），我们追踪了超过 10 万个搜索引擎结果页面（SERP）和 AI 模式响应中的 200 多万条产品列表。我们在同一天、同一时刻通过谷歌 AI 模式和传统搜索运行了相同的购物查询。当同一款产品同时出现在两者中时，AI 模式下的价格平均高出 21.6%。
When the same product appears on both sides, how do the prices compare? And how does the overall mix of recommended products differ between the two? That’s what this study set out to answer. Key findings at a glance: For matched products ranking in both AI Mode and traditional search, AI Mode is 21.6% more expensive. Looking at all products on each side (not just the matches), AI Mode listings sit 49% higher than traditional search listings. Only 1.28% of products ranking in traditional search also appear in AI Mode for the same search on the same day. Matched products show a price discrepancy 38.1% of the time; when they do, AI Mode is more expensive 68.4% of the time (about two-thirds). The main seller differs on 49.6% of matched products. 当同一产品出现在双方时，价格如何比较？推荐产品的整体组合有何不同？这就是本研究旨在回答的问题。主要发现概览：对于同时在 AI 模式和传统搜索中排名的匹配产品，AI 模式的价格贵 21.6%。观察双方的所有产品（不仅仅是匹配产品），AI 模式的列表价格比传统搜索高出 49%。在同一天进行的相同搜索中，只有 1.28% 在传统搜索中排名的产品也会出现在 AI 模式中。匹配产品中有 38.1% 的情况存在价格差异；在这些情况下，AI 模式有 68.4%（约三分之二）的时间更贵。在 49.6% 的匹配产品中，主要卖家不同。
Finding 1: the same products cost more in AI Mode
发现 1：相同产品在 AI 模式下价格更高
This is the most direct comparison in the study. Same product, same search, so the only thing changing is which search type you are on. We matched products across AI Mode and traditional search, then compared the lead price on each side. Across those matched pairs, AI Mode was 21.6% more expensive. 这是研究中最直接的比较。相同的产品，相同的搜索，唯一改变的是你所使用的搜索类型。我们将 AI 模式和传统搜索中的产品进行了匹配，然后比较了双方的领先价格。在这些匹配对中，AI 模式的价格高出 21.6%。
This is a fascinating study that reveals more about Google’s Shopping Graph and the inconsistencies between classic search and AI Mode for free listing placements. While the higher price might be displayed within the grid result in AI Mode (making the top-level comparison less accurate), what we tend to see is that the retailer with the lowest price gets the click in the end. This research is useful from a consumer perspective, as it is helpful to understand that the products being recommended in AI Mode might not be giving ‘price’ as much weighting as we would have expected. —— B Brodie Clark, Independent SEO Consultant 这是一项引人入胜的研究，它揭示了更多关于谷歌购物图谱（Shopping Graph）的信息，以及经典搜索与 AI 模式在免费列表展示方面的不一致性。虽然 AI 模式的网格结果中可能显示了更高的价格（这使得顶层比较不够准确），但我们倾向于看到，最终获得点击的是价格最低的零售商。从消费者的角度来看，这项研究很有用，因为它有助于理解 AI 模式中推荐的产品可能并没有像我们预期的那样给予“价格”足够的权重。 —— B Brodie Clark，独立 SEO 顾问
Same product, same query, and the price on the right is consistently higher. AI search was supposed to eliminate the friction of comparing prices across five different tabs, but if it only serves pricier inventory by default, it hasn’t saved us any work. We’re trading the visible effort of opening multiple windows for the invisible penalty of paying more without ever seeing the cheaper option that was one tab over. 相同的产品，相同的查询，右侧的价格始终更高。AI 搜索本应消除在五个不同标签页之间比较价格的麻烦，但如果它默认只提供更昂贵的库存，那它并没有为我们节省任何工作。我们用打开多个窗口的可见努力，换取了支付更多费用的隐形代价，却从未看到就在隔壁标签页中更便宜的选择。
When algorithms favor the more expensive item two-thirds of the time and swap out the seller entirely, it changes how discovery works. Open market comparison is replaced by a curated path to higher-priced stock. If these platforms are built for users, it’s worth asking: who actually benefits from this? —— K Katelyn Geary, Senior SEO Strategist, Break The Web 当算法在三分之二的时间里偏向更昂贵的商品并完全更换卖家时，它改变了发现商品的方式。公开市场比较被通往更高价格库存的策划路径所取代。如果这些平台是为用户构建的，那么值得一问：谁真正从中受益？ —— K Katelyn Geary，Break The Web 高级 SEO 策略师
Finding 2: AI Mode tends to surface higher-priced products
发现 2：AI 模式倾向于呈现价格更高的产品
Matched products give the cleanest comparison, but they’re only part of the picture. To see the bigger pattern, we also compared every priced listing on each side, including products that appear on only one of them. On this broader basis, the typical product in AI Mode is priced well above the typical product in traditional search: a median of $149 in AI Mode versus $100 in traditional search, about 49% higher. 匹配产品提供了最清晰的比较，但它们只是全貌的一部分。为了观察更大的模式，我们还比较了双方的每一个定价列表，包括仅出现在其中一侧的产品。在此更广泛的基础上，AI 模式下的典型产品价格远高于传统搜索中的典型产品：AI 模式的中位数为 149 美元，而传统搜索为 100 美元，高出约 49%。
The AI Mode side looks smaller for a simple reason: AI Mode shows far fewer products to begin with, so it makes up a much smaller share of all the listings we tracked. This is in line with our previous study. In the current data set, AI Mode makes up just 12.3% of all the products shown, an average of 3.9 products versus 27.8 in traditional search. AI 模式一侧看起来较小，原因很简单：AI 模式最初显示的产品要少得多，因此它在我们追踪的所有列表中所占份额要小得多。这与我们之前的研究一致。在当前数据集中，AI 模式仅占所有显示产品的 12.3%，平均为 3.9 个产品，而传统搜索为 27.8 个。
Finding 3: very little product overlap between AI Mode and traditional search
发现 3：AI 模式与传统搜索之间的产品重叠度极低
Even when both sides respond to the same search, they rarely show the same products on the same day. Across our data, only 1.28% of products ranking in traditional search also appeared in AI Mode. Our July study found a similar pattern at a broader level: AI Mode ranked just ~5% of the products that rank in traditional search overall. 即使双方都对同一次搜索做出响应，它们也很少在同一天显示相同的产品。在我们的数据中，只有 1.28% 在传统搜索中排名的产品也出现在 AI 模式中。我们 7 月份的研究在更广泛的层面上发现了类似的模式：AI 模式仅对传统搜索中排名的约 5% 的产品进行了排名。