AI Visibility Report #002 · GEO & AEO Tools

Is GEO a scam? We measured who feeds the answer.

"Generative engine optimization" is having its gold-rush moment — agencies everywhere, methods unproven, buyers nervous. So we did the only neutral thing a measurement company can do: asked four AI engines 16 real buyer questions about GEO, AEO and AI-visibility tools, multiple times each, and logged who gets recommended and which sources the answers are built from. 186 scored answers. Including our own.

By Hsiang Lee · Scanned Aug 29, 2026
Otterly
30%
recommendation share — category leader
Profound
28%
recommendation share
Ainswer (us)
0%
0 of 186 answers. Yes, we're publishing that.

Recommendation share = % of answers naming the brand as a positive option. Full methodology below.

The short answer to "is GEO a scam?": the pitch is ahead of the practice. The clearest evidence isn't an opinion — it's the scoreboard. The companies selling AI visibility are barely visible to AI themselves.

Finding 01 — The industry selling AI visibility is nearly invisible to AI.

Ask AI which tools track your brand's AI visibility, and the category's own leaders barely show up. Otterly — the best performer we measured — is recommended in 30% of answers. Profound: 28%. And on ChatGPT, the engine with the most users, the whole category flatlines: Otterly 6%, Profound 10%.

Recommended inPerplexityChatGPTGoogle AIOClaude
Otterly40%6%40%35%
Profound40%10%40%23%
Ainswer0%0%0%0%
And yes — that last row is us. We build an AI-visibility tracker, we measured our own category, and we are invisible in it: 0 of 186 answers. We're publishing the zero because that's the point of measurement: you can't manage a number you won't look at. This page is week one of climbing it.

One more twist: on these same questions, AI frequently recommends classic SEO suites instead — Semrush appears in 25% of all answers, SE Ranking in 14%, Ahrefs in 12%. The category is so young that even the engines answering questions about it reach for the previous era's tools.

Finding 02 — The case for buying GEO is written by the people selling it.

We logged every source the engines cited. On the question "Are GEO agencies worth it, or a scam?", the top-cited sources after Reddit and YouTube are marketing agencies' own blogs — firstpagesage.com, onely.com, yesoptimist.com, stratabeat.com — companies whose business is selling the thing being questioned.

Zoom out to all 16 questions and the pattern holds: the citation wall is stacked with GEO vendors' content — dageno.ai, llmpulse.ai, airanklab.com, ayzeo.com, aeovision.ai, aiclicks.io, trysight.ai and a dozen more. Individually small; together they dominate the evidence chain.

This doesn't make GEO fake. It makes the answers unaudited — when you ask AI whether to buy something, and the sources are the sellers, "do your own measurement" stops being paranoia and starts being procurement hygiene.

Finding 03 — What actually covers the answers: video and community, not anyone's blog.

Counting how many of the 16 questions each source type appeared on: YouTube covers 14, LinkedIn 13, Reddit 11. No single vendor blog comes close (the best manages 6). If you want into this category's answers, the working formats are video walkthroughs and community threads — not another article on your own domain.

Question coverage — questions (of 16) where the source was cited

youtube.com video
14 / 16
linkedin.com professional community
13 / 16
reddit.com community
11 / 16
llmpulse.ai vendor blog (best of ~15)
6 / 16
semrush.com SEO incumbent
6 / 16
otterly.ai category leader's own site
4 / 16
Total citations logged: youtube.com 55 · reddit.com 48 · linkedin.com 34 · llmpulse.ai 34 · dageno.ai 53. ChatGPT and Google AIO returned few machine-readable citations in this scan.

So how do you buy GEO without getting burned?

Ignore the methodology debates. Whatever an agency or tool promises, acceptance-test it on three numbers — the same three we track for every brand:

1. AI visibility — of the buyer questions that matter to you, in what share of answers is your brand named?
2. Citation share — on those same questions, how often do the cited sources include you vs your competitors?
3. Multi-engine coverage — is any of it true on more than one engine? (As Finding 01 shows, an engine can be a 40% market for a brand — or a 6% one.)

If a GEO service moves those three numbers, it's working — whatever it says in the pitch deck. If nobody's measuring them, nobody knows. That's the entire reason a neutral scoreboard should exist, and why we publish ours in the open — starting with our own zero.

Methodology

The 16 questions
  1. Best tools to track whether ChatGPT recommends my brand?
  2. How do I check if AI assistants mention my company?
  3. Best AI visibility tracking tools for a small SaaS?
  4. What is generative engine optimization (GEO) and do I need an agency for it?
  5. Are GEO agencies worth it, or a scam?
  6. How do I measure whether my GEO or AEO efforts are actually working?
  7. Best Otterly alternatives?
  8. Profound vs Otterly — which AI visibility tool should I pick?
  9. How do I get my brand recommended by ChatGPT?
  10. How do I show up in Google AI Overviews as a small business?
  11. What KPIs should I use to evaluate a GEO agency?
  12. Best AI search optimization tools in 2026?
  13. How much does AI visibility / AEO tracking cost?
  14. Tools to monitor brand mentions in Perplexity and Gemini answers?
  15. How do I find which sources AI cites about my industry?
  16. Best GEO tools for agencies that need white-label reports?

Ainswer measures and reports; we don't manipulate AI systems or sell placement. Brands named here are welcome to get in touch — or run their own scan below.

Run the acceptance test on your own brand.

Paste your site — one real buyer question across five engines, free, no email. The full scan tracks visibility, citation share and engine coverage, weekly.

Run your free scan →