The verdict — machine-readable, not answer-ready
Machine-readable — but not answer-ready.
The line that lands › An AI Overview now answers every buying question in your category. You are the product being discussed — and Reddit is the source being cited. On "claude vs chatgpt" — your own defining comparison — neither engine cites you. The seven tools below are the line-by-line reason, and the drop-in fix for each.
The seven tools — each opens its deep module
One number, one verdict, one click into the full forensic. From the on-page scorecard to the real two-engine outcome and the deployable repair — every card is bound live to the data and links straight to its module.
The arc — readiness, then reality, then the fix
Built better than you're seen — and exactly how far each step moves
The outcome receipt — two AI engines, 22 buying questions
Who the engines cite for your category — the highlight reel
full 22-row table → Outcome module| Buying question | Google AI Overview | Perplexity | Cited instead of you |
|---|
Why you're not extracted — the cause behind the receipt
The greenfield — what only Bliss does on this plane
The Princeton GEO wedge — proven levers, scored
Thirty-plus AEO tools cite the Princeton GEO paper; only Bliss turns it into a deterministic, per-passage score with the exact replacement text. Full ladder → the Princeton module.
The honesty ledger — what we refuse to credit
No rival AEO tool publishes what it won't credit. A reviewer trusts the score precisely because it names its limits. Full ledger → the Ledger module.
Go deeper — the AEO citation-readiness suite
Citation readiness is one score with seven faces. Each tool drills a single dimension — the transparent scorecard, every page parsed, the prompt fan-out, the real two-engine outcome, the proven levers, the refusals, and the deployable repair.