The fastest check costs nothing: ask the assistants yourself
Open ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity and ask each one the question your real buyers ask. Not your brand name. The moment. A med spa should ask what the best med spa near their city is for first-time Botox. A SaaS founder should ask which tool to pick for their exact use case. Write down who gets named, in what order, and what reasons the assistant gives.
Run the same prompt twice on different days. Answers shift as models retrain and re-crawl sources. One clean mention means little. A pattern of mentions, or a pattern of absence, is the signal.
Then score your readiness with the GEO Grader
Our GEO Grader is a free twenty-point checklist that scores how ready your site is to be cited by AI assistants. It covers the four layers that decide citations: whether your pages answer questions directly, whether your structure is machine-readable, whether trusted third-party sources mention you, and whether your entity information is consistent across the web.
It takes about five minutes and gives you an instant score with a verdict. No email required for the score itself. Most first-time scores land under ten out of twenty, which is normal and fixable.
What a checker can and cannot tell you
Any free checker, ours included, is a snapshot. It tells you whether you appear, roughly how favorably, and which competitors own the answers today. It cannot tell you why at the source level, track movement week over week across dozens of buying moments, or do the work that changes the answers.
That gap is where paid AI visibility platforms and agencies live. Before spending money, use the free checks to establish a baseline. If you are absent from the moments that drive your revenue, you have a case for going deeper. If you dominate them already, you mostly need monitoring.
Why tracking AI visibility feels so inconsistent
The same prompt can produce different brand lists in ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity, and different answers within the same assistant on different days. That is not a flaw in your checker. Assistants sample sources, personalize by context, and update constantly.
The practical fix is to test moments rather than single prompts, run checks on a schedule rather than once, and judge trends rather than snapshots. Our research across 1,200 buyer moments found that consistent presence across variations of a question is what separates brands that get recommended from brands that appear occasionally by luck.
From free check to fixed answers
If your check comes back thin, the free audit is the next step. We run your top buyer questions through the four major assistants and send back exactly how you appear, what is wrong or missing, and what it would take to fix it. From there, the work is content that answers real questions, structure that machines can parse, and citations from sources assistants trust.
Checking is free. Staying invisible is not. Every week you are absent from AI answers, the recommendation goes to someone else.
