cd /news/artificial-intelligence/i-scored-100-businesses-on-whether-a… · home topics artificial-intelligence article
[ARTICLE · art-114046] src=dev.to ↗ pub= topic=artificial-intelligence verified=true sentiment=· neutral

I scored 100 businesses on whether AI actually recommends them. Big brands are losing to indies.

A developer's audit of 100 businesses found that national brands score worst on AI recommendation readiness, averaging 75.5, while international companies lead with 91.5. The analysis, based on a controlled sample, shows that 79% of sites lack FAQ sections and 70% hide reviews, making it harder for AI models to cite them.

read2 min views1 publishedAug 28, 2026

Classic SEO measures whether you rank on Google. But AI answers are quietly eating the ten blue links, and that raises a different question with different signals: when someone asks ChatGPT, Claude or Google AI for a recommendation, can the model actually understand, trust and cite your business?

I wanted real data instead of vibes, so I ran a controlled audit of 100 businesses — 25 local, 25 national, 25 international, 25 niche B2B/SaaS — scoring how well each site gives AI systems what they need to recommend it. (Audit date: 2026-05-31.)

Full disclosure up front: I build a tool that does this scoring (GetVisus). But this post is the data and the takeaways, not a pitch — you can act on every finding here without any tool.

Category averages:

Category Avg score
International 91.5
B2B / niche SaaS 81.1
Local 79.8
National brands

75.5 (worst) | Big national brands often have beautiful, JS-heavy sites that are hard for an LLM to extract facts from — while a tiny coffee shop with a clear, text-first page wins outright.

Problem How many sites
No FAQ / no answer-ready sections 79
Reviews/testimonials not visible as on-page text 70
Pricing not visible 49
Business not recommended for its own core prompt 29
About / who-you-are unclear 27
Weak or missing structured data 9

The pattern across every 100/100 site was identical: the business entity, the offer, the proof, and the "who it's for" boundaries were all trivially easy to extract. The low scorers made the AI guess — and models don't guess in your favour.

This is a directional benchmark on a controlled sample, not a market-wide study, and not proof of exact revenue causation. The scoring reflects a model of what LLMs reward, not ground-truth from the model providers. But as AI answers replace the classic search results, "can an LLM cite you?" is becoming a real commercial question — and most sites, including big ones, are quietly failing it.

Full methodology and the 100-row dataset are in the benchmark report. Happy to answer methodology questions in the comments.

── more in #artificial-intelligence 4 stories · sorted by recency
── more on @getvisus 3 stories trending now
sponsored brought to you by zahid.host 4,200+ EU-deployed projects
reading about agents? ship yours in a single git push.

Run your AI side-project on zahid.host

EU-based hosting, git-push deploys, automatic HTTPS, no cold starts. Free tier with a custom domain — perfect for shipping the agent you just read about.

$git push zahid main
Live at https://your-agent.zahid.host
Get free account → Pricing
from €0/mo · no card required
LIVE [news/i-scored-100-busines…] indexed:0 read:2min 2026-08-28 ·