The AI visibility report.
A full audit in two parts, organic search and AI answers, benchmarked against three to five competitors you name. Findings are numbered and ordered by what they cost to fix, every figure carries the tool and date that produced it, and the report states what we couldn’t see from outside.
A short form, then we run the audit and walk you through it on a call. The $1,500 is the value we put on the work in it; nobody has ever been charged it.
Free, because the report is the argument.
Of the six providers we reviewed in August 2026, five either charged for the first assessment or routed it to a sales call. The sixth is self-serve software with no assessment to gate. We give ours away. The fastest way to show you something is measured properly is to measure it.
There is a limit, and it’s capacity. A real audit takes most of a working day, so a short qualifying form comes first. If we’re not the right fit, you hear that at the form stage rather than after.
Where you actually stand in Google.
Rankings for the searches that pay, checked town by town where your business is local. Then the index itself. Pages built to catch searches routinely sit outside it, earning nothing, so we check yours one URL at a time. Every dead page gets listed.
This half usually carries the cheapest fixes in the whole report. A page Google can’t see costs nothing to argue about and everything to leave alone.
A fixed question set, run across ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews.
We write the questions your buyers actually ask, fix the set, and run it repeatedly per engine at the same point in the month. The set never moves. That is what makes a second reading comparable.
- A question set written for your category, then fixed, so a second reading can be compared with the first
- No brand names inside the questions, ever
- Fresh, logged-out sessions, with no account history carried in
- Every question asked repeatedly per engine, so you can see how much the answers move on their own
- Perplexity and Claude can't be measured within their rules, so they're listed as not covered rather than quietly left out
Every answer scored, against competitors you name.
Competitors are named in the report rather than anonymised into a benchmark. If a rival is winning the category you will read their name, which is the only version of this that is useful to you.
The same count separates the two failures a single score hides. AI never pulls you up at all, which means the sources it trusts don’t vouch for you yet. Or it pulls you up and picks someone else, which means your pages don’t give it a usable answer. They need opposite work. The report tells you which one you have.
What the report contains.
- Where you actually rank, for the searches that pay, checked town by town where your business is local rather than averaged into one number.
- Whether Google holds your pages at all. Pages built to catch searches routinely sit outside the index earning nothing. Checked one URL at a time, with every dead page listed.
- How often AI names you, across ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, against the competitors you nominate.
- The specific questions where a competitor is named and you are not. The actual questions, with the actual answers, dated.
- Which of the two absence problems is yours. AI never pulls you up at all, which is an authority problem, or pulls you up and picks someone else, which is a content problem. They need opposite work, and most reports never separate them.
- Whether machines know who you are: if your name, services and service area resolve to one business everywhere, and who you're being confused with if not.
- Numbered findings, ordered by what they cost to fix, with the reasoning attached to each one, an appendix tracing each number back to the tool that produced it, and a section on what we couldn't see from outside.
You also get the raw measurements: questions, dates, engine, run counts. If you take the report to another agency, everything in it is checkable by them.
We show the answer, not a score.
A score tells you where you sit on someone else’s scale. The answer tells you what a buyer actually reads, which competitor gets named instead of you, and the exact wording you have to get into.
Every finding in the report is built this way: the engine, the question as asked, the capture date, and the answer stored unmodified so you can read it rather than take our word for it.
For independent clinics in the Chicago area, people often mention Northside Reproductive Health alongside two larger networks.
The six pillars.
They are kept apart on purpose. Fusing signals that have opposite fixes into one composite score is the thing that makes most visibility reports unusable.
What it is not.
It is not a ChatGPT screenshot with commentary. That version is quick to produce, and it reads that way.
Nothing in it is a guarantee, either. Generative engines are probabilistic: ask the same question twice and you can get different answers. Any report claiming a fixed ranking has either measured once or is not telling you how many times it measured. Ours states the run count on every figure.
And nobody arrives at the call to find a predetermined package waiting. Sometimes the finding is that your category is not being answered by AI in a way that matters yet, and that your money belongs somewhere else this quarter. That is a cheaper outcome for us than selling work that will not pay back.
- instrument
- Caul
- what was measured
- Where each named firm ranks and whether its pages are held by Google, plus whether it appears in AI answers to a fixed question set built for the category, per engine.
- how
- Rankings checked per town and per service where the business is local. Every question run multiple times per engine in fresh sessions, answers stored unmodified, with the run count printed beside every figure.
- over what window
- A stated capture window, published on every figure in the report.
- what this cannot tell you
- Being named is not being recommended, and it is not traffic or revenue. Answers vary by session and by region. ChatGPT, Gemini and Google AI Overviews are covered; Perplexity and Claude are named as not covered rather than quietly left out.
A short form, then five working days.
The form asks for your site, three to five competitors you actually lose to, and enough about the business to write questions your buyers would ask. No analytics access is required, though it sharpens the conversion pillar considerably if you share it.
The audit takes about five working days once the inputs are in. It is delivered on a call rather than by email, because the findings need explaining and the conversation is usually where the useful part happens. You keep everything either way.
Some readers arrive here already holding a report, because we build one before we ever write to a company we think we can help. If that’s you, skip the form: reply to the email and we’ll walk you through what we found.
Free, no card. The form takes about two minutes, then we run the audit and walk you through it on a call.