Germany’s biggest advertisers — rated by four generations of digital twins on brand experience quality, preference and brand trust. Pick a generation, pick a brand, go deep.
The NAWI dimensions explain why a brand experience is rated well or badly. This chart shows the verdict: the quality of the brand journey (0–100) against brand trust (0–100) — one logo per brand, seen through the eyes of the generation selected here.
Every point is a brand. Click a logo to open its brand profile. Dashed lines = generation averages, dotted line = trend. Highlights shows ~22 brands along the trend line – switch to “All brands” for the complete set. Axis ranges are fitted to the data (scale 0–100).
All ratings come from German consumer twins across four generations. The global view shows the 58 internationally recognized brands from the study.
Search in English or German — brand, category or parent company. Suggestions appear as you type.
How good does the road from first contact to everyday use feel? (0–100, from the brand-journey question) · Click a conflict row to compare what the generations actually said.
The four NAWI drivers explain most of preference. Across all 122 brands the NAWI index correlates with measured brand preference at r = 0.81 (across all 488 brand × generation cells: r = 0.72) — exactly what the BX Navigator model by Munzinger & Hartmann predicts.
Source: neuroflash digital-twin survey, June–August 2026 · 122 brands × 4 generations · Method & validation
Trust and brand experience quality go hand in hand. The overall verdict on the brand journey correlates at r = 0.81 with brand trust across 122 brands — and is at the same time the strongest single predictor of preference (r = 0.63 across all cells). Germany’s best brand journey: dm (79/100), just ahead of Lindt (77/100). The worst: Bild (24/100).
Source: neuroflash digital-twin survey, June–August 2026 · 122 brands × 4 generations · Method & validation
Being different alone does not win. Distinctiveness is the weakest single driver of preference (r = 0.44): standing out does not translate into being chosen. Usefulness (r = 0.63) pulls preference hardest.
Source: neuroflash digital-twin survey, June–August 2026 · 122 brands × 4 generations · Method & validation
Ad pressure does not buy an experience. 1&1 spends around €204m in gross ad spend, o2 around €115m — both land below average on trust and on brand experience quality. The RTL group (RTL, VOX, RTL+) spends more than €500m and is below average on trust and brand experience quality with all three brands. Heavy advertising is no substitute for a good brand experience: brand experience quality predicts brand preference strongly, at r = 0.72 at brand level.
Source: neuroflash digital-twin survey, June–August 2026 · 122 brands × 4 generations · Method & validation · Ad spend: Top 100 advertisers Germany 2025 · Values marked ** are researched estimates of the brand’s share of group-level spend (confidence mostly low to medium).
Validated against real market research. The trust measurement of the Digital Twins reproduces a real brand study (38 brands, 1,000+ respondents) at r = 0.856 — with no calibration. The same mechanism, applied to the NAWI framework.
Source: neuroflash digital-twin survey, June–August 2026 · 122 brands × 4 generations · Method & validation
Every category in the dataset tells its own story — who leads, who splits the generations, where ad budget fails to convert into trust. Click a category to open it in the brand database above.
Every number in this explorer comes from a documented, validated method. Here are the key pieces of evidence — the linked documents, and those available on request, carry the full analyses.
The trust question reproduces a real brand study of more than 1,000 consumers on 38 brands at r = 0.856 (MAE 7.3, without calibration); brand experience quality reaches r = 0.797. See the full validation study
That language models with consistent demographic identities can approximate real survey responses is published research — see Argyle et al. (2023), “Out of One, Many”, Political Analysis and Brand, Israeli & Ngwe (2023), Harvard Business School Working Paper on LLMs in market research.
Useful, Distinctive, Consistent and Interesting come from the BX Navigator® of the Multisense Institut (Munzinger/Hartmann); NAWI is the German acronym for the four drivers. In this dataset the NAWI index explains brand preference at r = 0.81 at brand level.
Trust is measured on a feeling-thermometer scale (0–100) — a survey-research format established since the 1960s (used, among others, by the American National Election Studies). The brand experience quality question won an internal tournament of 10 question formats × 5 scoring methods (documentation on request).
Split-half reliability of 0.88, bootstrap confidence intervals and leave-one-out cross-validation are documented in the method dossier (on request). The consequence: this explorer reports means only, never distributions.
24,295 individual judgments; the sample size per question is shown in each brand profile, cells with elevated variance carry a ⓘ marker, and estimated brand-level ad budgets are flagged with ** plus their derivation.
This whole table is one question put to five twins — per brand, per generation. Imagine what your category, your audience, your brand would return. Brand research in hours instead of weeks.
Discover Digital TwinsNumbers are the start. The NAWI strategists behind the model interpret what makes your brand more useful, more distinctive and more interesting — and turn that into preference.
Get in touch
Jonathan Mall
Olaf Hartmann
Uwe Munzinger