Brandwave

Osmocote vs Scotts:Which is more popular?

In September 2026, Osmocote had more branded searches than Scotts among fertiliser brands worldwide. Osmocote had about 22,200 branded searches, while Scotts had 1,600. Osmocote made up 3.2% of all fertiliser brand searches we track, and Scotts accounted for 0.23%. When we asked ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews about fertiliser brands, Scotts appeared in three of the five answers and Osmocote in two. Osmocote and Scotts were each mentioned first in one of the two answers.

Among fertiliser brands worldwide in September 2026

Who do people search for more?

Osmocote, about 14 searches for every 1 for Scotts

Osmocote 22.2K searchesScotts 1.6K searches

Who does AI mention more?

Scotts, mentioned in 3 of 5 answers, Osmocote in 2

Scotts in 3 of 5Osmocote in 2 of 5

Who does AI recommend more?

Each is named first in 1 of 2 answers.

Osmocote first in 1Scotts first in 1

Follow Osmocote vs Scotts and get free monthly updates on what changed

By continuing you'll get index updates and occasional product news from Brandwave. Unsubscribe any time. Privacy

Track your brand against a rival →

Top fertiliser brands in ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews

In three ChatGPT questions and two Google AI Overviews, Scotts was mentioned in three out of five: in two of the three ChatGPT answers and in one of the two Google AI Overviews. Osmocote was mentioned in two out of five: in two of the three ChatGPT answers, but not in either of the two Google AI Overviews. Osmocote and Scotts were each listed first in one of the two answers.

Most recommended by AI

Brands get a higher ranking if they are mentioned earlier in the answers.

  1. Espoma1st
  2. Miracle-Gro2nd
  3. Osmocote3rd
  4. Scotts4th
  5. ICL–
  6. Haifa–
  7. Nutrien–
  8. Yara–

Mentioned by AI

Each dot is one answer, filled in when that answer mentions the brand.

  • Scotts3 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
  • Miracle-Gro2 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • Osmocote2 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • Espoma2 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • ICL0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • Haifa0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • Nutrien0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
  • Yara0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers

See every answer about fertiliser brands

5 answers
  • Asked ChatGPT

    “Which fertiliser brand should I buy?”

    1. 1Espoma
    2. 2Miracle-Gro
    3. 3Osmocote
  • Asked ChatGPT

    “What are the best fertiliser brands?”

    1. 1Espoma
    2. 2Miracle-Gro
    3. 3Scotts
    4. 4Osmocote
  • Asked ChatGPT

    “What's the best fertiliser brand for a healthy lawn?”

    1. 1Scotts
  • Searched Google, AI Overview

    “lawn fertiliser”

    1. 1Scotts
  • Searched Google, AI Overview

    “garden fertiliser”

    Not named in any answer:

    Brands are shown in the order each answer named them. The survey took place in the United States on October 20, 2026.

    Is Osmocote or Scotts more popular in search?

    This chart shows how often people search Google for Osmocote and Scotts by name. Each line represents a brand's share of searches for all eight fertiliser brands we track, month by month, from English-language searches worldwide.

    Osmocote and Scotts among fertiliser brands worldwide, by month

    Share of searches by month for Osmocote, Scotts. The figures are in the table below the chart.

    View monthly share of searches table
    MonthICLHaifaNutrienMiracle-GroOsmocoteEspomaScottsYara
    Oct 202560.6%22.2%8.2%4.5%3.7%0.59%0.21%0.01%
    Nov 202559.7%21.8%9.8%4.4%3.6%0.48%0.17%0.01%
    Dec 202566.4%19.9%7.3%3.3%2.7%0.34%0.13%0.02%
    Jan 202663.9%19.1%8.6%3.9%3.9%0.5%0.15%0.02%
    Feb 202652.8%28.9%8.7%4.8%3.9%0.63%0.28%0.02%
    Mar 202637.5%45.9%6.2%5%4.1%0.83%0.37%0.01%
    Apr 202648.8%26.7%6.6%9.8%6.6%1.1%0.48%0.01%
    May 202659.9%14.6%5.4%12%6.6%1.1%0.32%<0.01%
    Jun 202653.2%19.4%7.2%13.1%5.8%0.95%0.34%0.02%
    Jul 202658.5%21.4%5.3%9.6%4.3%0.7%0.21%0.01%
    Aug 202657.4%21%7.7%7.7%5.2%0.69%0.31%<0.01%
    Sep 202664.7%19.4%7.1%4.8%3.2%0.52%0.23%0.01%

    How has the Osmocote and Scotts comparison changed over the last 12 months?

    3 findings
    • Osmocote was ahead of Scotts in every measured month of the 12 months ending September 2026.
    • Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Osmocote’s share of searches among fertiliser brands worldwide moved from 3.7% to 3.2%, and its estimated monthly branded searches held steady at 22.2K.
    • Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Scotts’ share of searches among fertiliser brands worldwide moved from 0.21% to 0.23%, and its estimated monthly branded searches moved from 1.3K to 1.6K.

    How did search popularity change for fertiliser brands worldwide in September 2026?

    2 changes
    1. In September 2026, Osmocote lost share of searches among fertiliser brands worldwide, from 5.2% to 3.2%.

    2. Estimated monthly branded searches for Scotts worldwide rose 23.1% over 12 measured months, from 1.3K to 1.6K in September 2026.

    How are branded searches counted?

    2 search terms

    Brandwave collects information about searches that people make online using Osmocote’s and Scotts’ names. When viewed over time, estimated search volumes for these branded terms can be used to understand whether interest in the brands is growing, holding steady, or fading.

    Osmocote

    1 branded search term

    • osmocote

    Scotts

    1 branded search term

    • scotts lawn

    How the Brand Demand Index is measured

    Other head-to-heads among fertiliser brands

    Creator with pink hair and a pink jacket

    Put your own brand in this comparison

    Brandwave tracks your branded demand next to the rival you actually watch, with your campaigns, spend and outcomes on the same timeline.