Which is the best AI visibility agency?

How to get into ChatGPT's answers

On buying-intent questions ChatGPT does not pick sources at random. In our measurements the same layer keeps deciding: the identity layer. The domain, the URL slug, the page title and the H1 together tell the machine who you are, what you do and for whom — and when those four do not say the same thing, even the best content gets misclassified: cited, but not recommended.

The type of question decides too: a “how do I choose” question gets a guide cited, a price question a pricing page, a “which company” question a service page. Bare keyword overlap gets you into what the machine reads, but does not get you cited — in our August measurements a dozen companies with “geo” in their name entered the retrieval set without a single citation in the answer.

AVE Studio's methodology works on this layer, in four intervention classes: harmonising the identity layer (domain–slug–title–H1) to buyers' actual questions · a controlled network of owned surfaces that point at each other · refreshing existing content so it points back to the canonical surface · and measuring before and after every intervention. The exact steps and their order are a trade secret. The outcome is public: this report.

The measurement: 5 questions, 7 runs each

We measured five Hungarian buying-intent questions, each in seven independent runs. Every run started in a fresh, empty, temporary ChatGPT conversation, on the same account, on the same day, in ChatGPT's reasoning mode. A provider scored a mark in a run when it appeared in the answer as a source. That is 35 data points in total; the runs surfaced 17 Hungarian providers and 33 foreign or non-agency sources.

The five questions, verbatim (Hungarian originals with English glosses):

1. milyen geo ügynökséget válasszak — which GEO agency should I choose
2. melyik geo ügynökséget javasolod — which GEO agency do you recommend
3. melyik geo marketing ügynökséget válasszam — which GEO marketing agency should I pick
4. nem vagyok látható az AI válaszaiban, melyik céget javaslod — I am not visible in AI answers — which company do you recommend
5. ai láthatósági ügynökségek — AI visibility agencies

The result: the mention matrix

Each cell shows in how many of the seven repetitions a provider appeared. The table is complete: we are not in first place, and we do not hide that — the credibility of the measurement is worth more than a prettier ranking.

From outside the Hungarian field, 33 sources appeared, most of them once: the most frequent were axios.com (5 runs, press) and bevisibleagency.com (3), then clutch.co, arxiv.org, devilab.eu and radyant.io (2 each); a further 27 domains appeared in one run each.

Marketing21 is the established default: 20/35, standing at 5–6/7 on three questions. It cannot be beaten with more mentions — only in a different category, which is exactly what the fourth question shows.

AVE Studio is the second most-mentioned Hungarian provider at 14/35. Its strongest cell is P4 (“I am not visible in AI answers”): 6/7 — one of the highest single values in the matrix. Where the question describes the symptom rather than the service's name, measurement-based content wins.

Our largest open gap is P1 (“which GEO agency should I choose”): 0/7. We state it rather than explain it away — on this question we do not exist today, and the next measurement round watches this cell.

'Vantgard Digital is strong on the same questions we are (P4: 5/7, P3: 4/7) — the closest competitor for these queries.

Keyword-stuffed domains are practically invisible: none got past 1/35; and the fifth question is chaotic — over thirty different domains in seven runs, with barely any overlap. The field is carried by branded domains, not keyword ones.

Where it started: the zero is documented too

This report is not a snapshot but the latest point of a dated series. Every earlier point is measured and backed by raw data.

1. 2026-08-02AVE Studio's 31-question, four-engine panel (API surface): on the category questions AVE Studio received 0 mentions. The raw data (mentions.csv) is public on the panel's page: Model Mindshare Report — CEE, 2026 Q3 (the four-engine panel).
2. 2026-08-08A 40-call ChatGPT measurement (gpt-4o + web search, API surface): 0 mentions, 0 citations.
3. 2026-08-19The last layers of AVE Studio's methodology go live. The intervention classes are described above; the exact steps are a trade secret.
4. 2026-08-2135-run re-measurement on the ChatGPT product interface: 14/35 — the second most-mentioned Hungarian provider.

Two things must be added, in honesty. One: the measurement points were not taken on the same surface (API versus product interface), so we publish the arc as a state change, not a numeric curve: not mentioned → second most-mentioned. Two: on a single engine, without a control group, we do not claim causality — but the order, the size and the dates of the interventions and the result are documented, and the measurement is repeatable by anyone.

What this measurement does not claim

• It measures one engine (ChatGPT), on one day, from one account. Gemini, Perplexity and Google AI Mode require separate measurements and may return a different field.
• A mention is a source appearance, not a recommendation ranking: it counts who the answer uses, not who it names first.
• Seven repetitions show a trend, not an exact proportion: ±1 between cells is noise; the difference between 0 and 5–6 is real.
• We claim no guarantee, and could not: the spread between runs shows exactly why nobody can promise a position in these engines.

Why AVE Studio?

AVE Studio works to get your brand named and cited by AI answer engines. We do not advise on it — we deliver: entity architecture, machine readability, the access layer and answer-ready content, in code, into your system. That is the GEO, AEO and KEO work.

We start with measurement, because without it nobody knows what worked — but measurement is the instrument, not the goal. We do not guarantee placement, because in a generated answer nobody can. What we do commit to: a baseline measurement, a checkable intervention in code, a re-measurement by the same method, and the raw data stays yours. Our methodological requirements are fixed in a public, 18-point standard.

The 18-point methodology standardPublic measurements

Measure yourself

The method is not a secret — the exact steps we work with are. This is how to measure your own visibility:

1. Write down 20–30 questions your buyer would actually type into ChatGPT — in their words, not your keywords.
2. Run each at least five times, always in a new, empty conversation — a single run is not a measurement, it is an anecdote.
3. Do not count your position; count the share of runs that mention you at all.
4. Repeat monthly with the same question list — measure a trend, not a snapshot.

Related measurements and surfaces

The 2 August 2026 four-engine panel is this report's starting point; our service page describes what we do with what we measure here.

Model Mindshare Report — CEE, 2026 Q3 (the four-engine panel)GEO agency for European companies