How ready are websites for AI search?
On the AI visibility side an ordinary site stands lower than on the SEO side — usually between 30 and 50 points. What is missing is not content but four things: a deliberate decision about AI bots, text without JavaScript, questions with answers, and verifiable facts. All four are fixed once and cost no monthly invoice.
If the technical SEO score of a typical site is around 50–60, the AI side is almost always lower. And the reason is not that someone was lazy.
The numbers draw on roughly 500 audits run on our earlier platform and on what we see today. The exports from that work are gone, so these are ranges rather than precise statistics.
Why the gap is natural
AI visibility work appeared later than the SEO services market. The typical package — audit, links, articles — took shape when assistants did not exist, and to this day it mentions none of the things that decide citation.
So a site can be well maintained and still stand low: nobody ever offered its owner this work.
What is missing most often
A deliberate decision about bots. robots.txt usually does not name AI bots
at all, so the outcome is accidental — covered separately in does your
robots.txt let AI bots in.
Text without JavaScript. If content only appears in a browser, the page is empty to a bot. This is the most common reason a site "exists" and is never cited.
A form worth citing. A service description without a single question and answer gives a model no passage to lift.
Verifiable facts. You cannot quote "fast and reliable". You can quote a number with a source.
What already works
Two places where sites look better than expected:
HTTPS and mobile layouts. Effectively a closed question — templates did that for everyone.
Content in the local language. Fewer questions are asked in smaller languages, and fewer suitable sources exist for them. The same work therefore returns more than it would in English.
What this means in practice
A low score on this side is better news than a low SEO score: the list is short, the work is one-off, and the competition is thinner. A site that closes the four points above usually moves from "invisible" to "one of the few that get cited".
Where to start: GEO in 2026. What the ones who did it look like: above 80 points.
A free scan returns both scores at once.
Related articles
- GEO in 2026: does AI find your site
- Does your robots.txt let AI bots in
- Which pages ChatGPT cites most often
- What score a typical website actually has
What gets checked is listed under what we check.
Sources
What this text is based on — primary sources, not retellings:
Frequently asked
Is AI visibility worth investing in while the traffic from it is small?
It is worth it when your buyers ask assistants before buying. The work is cheap and one-off, and part of it — structure, facts, FAQs — raises ordinary SEO too.
Is competition really thinner in smaller languages?
Fewer questions are asked, and fewer suitable sources exist to answer them. A tidy page in a smaller language therefore has a better chance of being cited than an equivalent English one.
Do I need a separate specialist for the AI side?
Usually not. Most of the work is technical and editorial: access, template, headings, facts. The same people who maintain the site can do it.
How do I measure whether it improved?
The simple way is asking assistants the same questions monthly and recording whether your domain appears. The precise way is watching AI referrers in analytics.
Check yours
A free scan shows which of the things described here your site already does, and which it does not.