AI Visibility Checker

Your first GEO audit is free. You paste your URL, Citeme generates your prompts, queries the engines and returns your GEO Score with the full dimension breakdown. The audit runs inside the Citeme app, so you create an account to launch it. We say that plainly because several tools in this category advertise a score with no signup and then gate the part that matters, which is the breakdown of why the score is what it is. Continuous monitoring, scheduled re-audits and the content agents are part of the paid platform.

Ten: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok 4.3, Google AI Overviews, Siri AI, DeepSeek, Meta AI and Mistral. The chat models are queried through their official APIs. Google AI Overviews is captured from the SERP, because there is no API for it. Coverage matters more than it sounds, because the same site can be strong on Perplexity, which indexes the live web, and nearly absent from ChatGPT, which leans more on training patterns. Checking one engine and calling it AI visibility is how teams end up optimizing for the surface their buyers do not use.

A rank tracker records your position in a list of results for a query. An AI visibility checker records whether a generated answer used your content as a source, and how it framed you while doing it. The practical consequence is that position is no longer the main metric. A page ranking fourth on Google can be the source an AI Overview quotes, and a page ranking first can be ignored entirely. Sentiment also enters the picture: an engine can cite you and describe you unfavourably, which a rank tracker has no way to represent.

The GEO Score is a 0 to 100 composite built from eight weighted dimensions, from AI discoverability at 20% down to the technical baseline at 10%. AI discoverability carries the most weight for a blunt reason: an engine that cannot fetch your pages will never cite them, whatever the content quality. Read the breakdown before the headline number. A site at 65 overall might sit at 92 on metadata and 28 on content depth, which means the work is editorial rather than technical. The reverse is just as common, and the two need completely different budgets.

Google AI Overviews is included in the ten engines, so a full check already covers it. What a full check does not do is follow it at the level of detail that Google specific work needs: which of your queries trigger an AI Overview at all, how that trigger rate moves week to week, and how your share of the citations compares with your competitors on that one surface. If Google is where your demand sits, start with the full check to see the whole landscape, then narrow down. Our AI Overviews tracker page covers the metrics specific to that surface.

Start with a baseline before any optimization work, then re-check on three triggers. After a significant content change, within about two weeks, because engines with live retrieval pick changes up quickly. On a regular cycle of four to six weeks, because the engines change on their own and a stable site can lose ground without touching anything. And when a competitor publishes against your core queries. Teams that only check once tend to conclude that GEO does not move. It moves; it is the sampling that was too sparse to see it.

Yes. A competitor URL is audited exactly like your own, which is the fastest way to understand why an engine prefers them: their structured data, their content depth, their authority signals, each scored on the same eight dimensions. Every audit also captures competitors implicitly, because your prompts are the prompts they appear in. You see which brand is cited first most consistently and what share of the citations each one takes across the engines and prompts audited.