Preview only. This page illustrates the structure of an Answerprint report using fictional data. Delivered reports reflect your brand's actual observed AI answer behavior and are provided as a formatted PDF dossier. Section layout and scoring details may differ in the final deliverable.
Sample report · Northstar Roasters (fictional)
AI Answer Visibility Report
A point-in-time snapshot of how a brand appears across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews. Prompts are grouped by intent type and scored by observed visibility state.
Prompts checked
24
AI surfaces
4
Brand mentions
9
Source gaps
6
Executive brief
Current AI visibility posture
Top narrative
The target brand is visible in broad educational and category prompts but loses ground when buyers search for comparisons, alternatives, or agency-ready recommendations. The primary gap is not content volume — it is source-friendly proof pages and a missing comparison anchor that competitors already own.
What this means for the client
- • AI systems understand the category but don't consistently associate this brand with buyer-intent use cases.
- • Competitors win because they have fresher, more citable pages.
- • A focused 30-day content sprint can close the most visible citation gaps.
AI visibility score
38 / 100
Moderate baseline — present for broad category prompts, weak in buyer-intent contexts.
Mention share
37%
Brand mentioned in 9 of 24 tested prompts across 4 AI surfaces.
Source gap count
6
Pages cited for competitors that the target brand is missing or underrepresented on.
Query-level analysis
Prompt-by-prompt visibility log
Prompts, surfaces, visibility state, source notes, and competitor pressure per query.
| ID | Prompt | Surface | Status | Observed note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAT-014 | best local roasting partners for hotel groups | ChatGPT | Visible | Brand mentioned after two broader category suppliers. |
| CMP-022 | Northstar Roasters vs regional specialty suppliers | Perplexity | Missing | No brand mention; a competitor cited from a 2025 roundup article. |
| BUY-031 | coffee supplier with training for multi-location teams | Gemini | Partial | Brand appears in a secondary paragraph without citation link. |
| CAT-018 | specialty coffee wholesale B2B supplier | Google AI Overviews | Partial | Listed in broad summary but not as primary recommendation. |
| CMP-035 | alternatives to Competitor A for boutique hotels | ChatGPT | Missing | Target brand absent; two other alternatives cited instead. |
| BUY-044 | coffee partner for hotel F&B program | Perplexity | Visible | Directly recommended with a link to the services page. |
Competitor matrix
How the brand appears against each selected competitor
Competitor A
High visibility
Named in 7 of 8 tested comparison prompts. Cited from a dedicated comparison page and two roundup articles.
Competitor B
Medium visibility
Appears in broad category prompts but weak on buyer-intent and alternative queries.
Northstar Roasters
Low visibility
Present in category prompts. Absent in most comparison and buyer-intent queries. Source gaps identified on key pages.
Competitive gap
The target brand has enough baseline authority to appear occasionally, but the current site does not provide the compact proof blocks and comparison pages that AI systems repeatedly use as citation anchors.
Source gap inventory
What proof, FAQ, or citation material is missing
Comparison page
No dedicated page comparing the brand to top competitors. Competitor A fills this void in Perplexity results.
Client proof statistics
No publicly accessible figures (client count, volumes, case outcomes) for AI systems to cite as evidence.
FAQ schema markup
Core service pages lack structured FAQ markup, which AI systems use as a direct citation anchor.
Agency-facing language
Category and service pages do not address hotel/F&B or multi-location terminology that buyer-intent prompts trigger.
Action list
Prioritized content, FAQ, and proof recommendations
Create a public comparison page
Publish a factual, brand-to-brand comparison page for the two most cited competitors. AI systems use comparison pages as reliable citation anchors.
Add proof blocks to key service pages
Concise client statistics, testimonials, and structured FAQ schema on product pages directly reduce source gaps.
Refresh the category landing page
Update terminology to reflect current buyer language and add hotel/hospitality-specific copy to align with buyer-intent queries.
Build a prompt response library
Prepare 5–10 short answer snippets for sales and content teams. These doubles as AI-citeable FAQ content.
Methodology
Point-in-time snapshot, no placement promise
AI answers vary by platform, time, account context, location, and prompt wording. Each prompt is run without signed-in accounts and logged as observed at time of audit. This report documents observed behavior and gaps — it does not guarantee ranking, citation, or future AI placement.
Visible — brand directly named or cited as a primary recommendation.
Partial — brand appears, but not as a primary recommendation or citation.
Missing — brand is absent or mentioned without evidence link.