Who handles the technical side of AEO and GEO?
Technical AEO and GEO: The Agencies The Shortlist Report Finds
10 firms lead, appearing in 9.0–15.4% of 78 AI responses. The sample cannot separate them, so we do not pretend it can.
No clear leader
No single firm dominates this question. Ten come up regularly and they specialise in different things, so the firm worth calling is the one that fits your situation rather than whoever sits highest.
Enleaf12 of 78
Implements schema markup and entity optimization to build consensus signals for AI visibility in GEO.
The AI Search Agency11 of 78
Offers JSON-LD structured data deployment and GEO services to communicate business identity and services to AI systems.
Pfaff Digital10 of 78
Provides AI search visibility services including structured data, entity consistency, and AI-readable website infrastructure.
AI Search Engineers9 of 78
Focuses on AEO and schema deployment strategies for professional services businesses.
Cursive9 of 78
Provides schema markup and LLM optimization services to make content more machine-readable for AI systems.
+5 more, tiedin the table
Based on 78 ChatGPT responses to this question, collected September 3, 2026–September 22, 2026. Firms are counted once per response. How we measure.
The ranking
| Firm | Responses | Share | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 10 firms, 9.0–15.4% | |||
| Enleafenleaf.comImplements schema markup and entity optimization to build consensus signals for AI visibility in GEO. | 12 of 78 | 15.4% | |
| The AI Search AgencyOffers JSON-LD structured data deployment and GEO services to communicate business identity and services to AI systems. | 11 of 78 | 14.1% | |
| Pfaff Digitalpfaffdigital.comProvides AI search visibility services including structured data, entity consistency, and AI-readable website infrastructure. | 10 of 78 | 12.8% | |
| AI Search EngineersFocuses on AEO and schema deployment strategies for professional services businesses. | 9 of 78 | 11.5% | |
| Cursivecursive.worksProvides schema markup and LLM optimization services to make content more machine-readable for AI systems. | 9 of 78 | 11.5% | |
| CrawlCheckcrawlcheck.ioTests what AI crawlers receive and evaluates reach, readability, and quotability signals for websites. | 8 of 78 | 10.3% | |
| OpenForBotsopenforbots.comFocuses on AI crawler and discovery readiness audits, checking bot access, structured data, and entity signals. | 8 of 78 | 10.3% | |
| POLARISpolarisagency.comOffers GEO audits, entity optimization, technical GEO, digital PR, and LLM visibility tracking for larger organizations. | 7 of 78 | 9.0% | |
| Revisiblerevisible.comAI search optimization including schema markup implementation and entity consistency for AI platforms. | 7 of 78 | 9.0% | |
| VOCTOSvoctos.comProvides entity audits, Knowledge Panel optimization, structured data, and brand signal consistency work. | 7 of 78 | 9.0% | |
Key findings
- No firm answers “Who handles the technical side of AEO and GEO?” reliably in ChatGPT. The most-named, Enleaf, appeared in 12 of 78 responses (15.4%) collected September 3, 2026–September 22, 2026, and 9 other firms scored close enough that the sample cannot put any of them in order.
- Enleaf, The AI Search Agency and Pfaff Digital were named most often, in 10–12 of 78 responses. All 10 firms in the leading group are listed with their counts in the table below.
- 10 firms cleared the reporting threshold on “Who handles the technical side of AEO and GEO?” in ChatGPT as of September 22, 2026; the full table with response counts is below.
- POLARIS appears in 2 of the 9 AEO, GEO and AI visibility agencies reports published by The Shortlist Report, the widest coverage of any firm named on this page.
- No firm paid to appear in this ranking; placement cannot be bought, and the counts come from ChatGPT responses rather than from submissions.
Why the tiers fall where they do
Tier 1 holds Enleaf, The AI Search Agency, Pfaff Digital, AI Search Engineers, Cursive, CrawlCheck, OpenForBots, POLARIS, Revisible and VOCTOS, named in 7 to 12 of the 78 ChatGPT responses. They are grouped rather than ranked because the gaps between them are inside the margin of error at this sample size — one extra mention would reorder them, so an order would be reporting noise as a finding.
The test is McNemar’s at 95%, applied against the same 78 responses for every firm. The full reasoning, and what happened when we ranked one-to-N instead.
What the sample shows
10 firms lead this question: Enleaf, The AI Search Agency, Pfaff Digital, AI Search Engineers, Cursive, CrawlCheck, OpenForBots, POLARIS, Revisible and VOCTOS. They appear in 9.0–15.4% of the 78 responses. The gaps between them are inside the margin of error at this sample size, so they are listed together rather than ranked against each other.
103 firms were named at least once across the sample. 10 of them cleared the threshold of 2 responses and appear above; the rest were named once and are inside the noise.
How to read this
Firms are grouped into tiers, not ranked one to fifteen. A tier holds every firm whose 95% confidence interval overlaps the leader's, which is a long way of saying the sample cannot tell them apart. Order within a tier is arbitrary — read the counts, not the position.
Share is the percentage of responses that named the firm — not a quality score. A firm scoring low here may be excellent and simply under-written about online, which is a finding about its visibility rather than its work.
The same question was asked repeatedly because AI assistants do not answer identically twice. A single response would tell you almost nothing.
What this measurement does not tell you
- It is not a quality ranking. Share reflects how much has been written about a firm online, which is what an AI assistant reads. A capable firm nobody writes about scores low here.
- It is a reading from a date range, not a permanent standing. This sample was collected September 3, 2026–September 22, 2026; models change and so do their answers.
- It covers ChatGPT only. Other assistants answer differently, and we do not extrapolate across engines we have not measured.
- Order within a tier is arbitrary. Read the counts, not the position. Why we use tiers.
Cite this report
The Shortlist Report. (2026). Technical AEO and GEO: The Agencies The Shortlist Report Finds. The Shortlist Report. https://www.shortlistreport.com/article/technical-aeo-geo
Underlying counts: CSV · JSON. Every answer they were counted from: plain text · JSON. All reusable under CC BY 4.0 with attribution.