Back to the study

AGCO

agcocorp.com · Industrial · AGCO

Ranked 480 of 2,047 companies in the study

39Overall score
  • Visibility17
  • Citations1
  • Sentiment82
  • Site quality93
  • AI readiness21
What this means for AGCO

AI assistants name AGCO in 13.3% of answers, which is more often than the typical company in the industrial sector at 5%. AGCO has an overall score of 39 out of 100, ranking 480th of 2,047 companies in the study. Its website passes 3 out of 14 technical checks, showing some readiness for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about the industrial market: none named AGCO. AI assistants named it in 8 of 60 answers (13.3%). The typical industrial company is named in 5.0% of answers. By how often it is named, AGCO ranks 56 of 246 in its sector.

Named by AI in
13.3%
8 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
22.2%
compared with 5 rivals
AI readiness
3/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 3
Rank in its sector
37 of 246
by overall score, where the typical industrial company scores 31
How AGCO compares with all 2,047 companies

Every dot is a company in the study. Hover one to see it; click to open its report.

This companySame sectorEvery other companyNever named

What makes up the score

Five parts, each scored out of 100.

Visibility
17

How often AI assistants name the company

Citations
1

How often AI uses the company's own website as a source

Sentiment
82

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
93

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
21

How easily AI tools can read and use the website

Visibility is calculated from the answers on this page. How the score is built.

Compared with industrial

246 companies in this sector. The line on each bar is the typical company.

Overall score39
Ranks 37 of 246. Typical company: 31
Named in answers13%
Ranks 56 of 246. Typical company: 5%
AI readiness21
Ranks 107 of 246. Typical company: 21
What Perplexity actually said

An answer that names the company

“Recommended advanced technology solutions for precision farming operations”

For precision farming operations, the most recommended advanced technology stack combines GPS-guided machinery, variable rate technology (VRT), remote sensing, in-ground/IoT sensors, AI analytics, and automation/robotics to improve yield, reduce input waste, and support faster decisions.

The strongest options, based on the sources, are:

GPS field mapping and auto-steer: improves spatial accuracy and reduces overlap during planting, fertilizing, and harvesting.

Variable rate technology (VRT): adjusts seeds, fertilizer, and crop- …

The AI’s answer as we received it, shortened and not checked for accuracy.

Also named
John Deere19CLAAS1
Share of mentions

How the mentions in these answers were split between this company and its rivals

John Deere
51.6%
AGCO
25.8%
CLAAS
9.7%
CNH Industrial (Case IH & New Holland Agriculture)
6.5%
Versatile
6.5%
Kubota Tractor Corporation
0.0%
Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Gemini
3/15
OpenAI
2/15
Perplexity
2/15
Claude
1/15
Ready for AI agents

What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and buy from, on a scale of six levels.

  1. 0
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5

Level 1: Basic web presence. Two of robots.txt, a sitemap and Link headers are in place.

To reach level 2:
  • Content Signals
Show every check, for your technical team
Discoverability
77 of 100
  • robots.txtPassed

    A valid robots.txt with crawl rules at the site root.

    study: 92.0%
  • SitemapPassed

    An XML sitemap listing the pages, ideally referenced from robots.txt.

    study: 86.8%
  • Link headersNot met

    Send Link headers such as rel="api-catalog" or rel="describedby" on the homepage.

    study: 0.3%
  • DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present

    Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.

    study: 5.5%
Content accessibility
0 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

    Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.

    study: 1.9%
  • llms.txtNot met

    Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.

    study: 25.1%
Bot access control
32 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPartly met

    Add explicit robots.txt groups for the main AI crawlers.

    study: 93.4%
  • Content SignalsNot met

    Add a Content-Signal line for search, ai-input and ai-train to robots.txt.

    study: 1.4%
  • Web Bot AuthNot present

    Only relevant if you run your own agents or crawlers: publish a signing key directory.

    study: 0.2%
APIs, auth and MCP
0 of 100
  • API CatalogNot met

    List public APIs in a linkset at /.well-known/api-catalog.

    study: 0.3%
  • OAuth discoveryNot met

    Publish OpenID Connect or OAuth server metadata under /.well-known.

    study: 11.8%
  • OAuth Protected ResourceNot met

    Serve protected resource metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource.

    study: 10.3%
  • auth.mdNot met

    Publish an auth.md describing how agents sign in.

    study: 0.0%
  • MCP Server CardNot met

    Offer an MCP server and publish its server card under /.well-known.

    study: 0.2%
  • A2A Agent CardNot met

    Publish an agent card at /.well-known/agent-card.json.

    study: 0.1%
  • Agent SkillsNot met

    Publish a skills index with the main tasks agents can do.

    study: 0.2%
  • WebMCPCould not check

    Register key actions such as search or cart as WebMCP tools.

    study: 33.7%
  • ARD manifestNot met

    Publish an ai-catalog.json listing every agent interface.

    study: 0.1%

Score 25 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.agcocorp.com · 2,047 companies scanned

See how every company did, and how this was measured.

The checks behind the AI readiness score

3 of 14 passed. This list is for your technical team. The percentage is how many companies in the study pass each check.

These 14 checks ran during the audit and are what the AI readiness part of the overall score counts. The scan above ran later and is stricter on Link headers and Markdown, so a check can pass here and not there.

Show the 14 checks
Discoverability
  • Passedrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.0%
  • PassedXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
  • Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 29.0%
Content Accessibility
  • Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 8.3%
  • Not metllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
  • PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
Bot Access Control
  • Not metExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 13.0%
API / Auth / MCP
  • Not metAPI Catalog (.well-known/api-catalog)study: 0.2%
  • Not metOAuth Authorization Server discoverystudy: 10.1%
  • Not metOAuth Protected Resource discoverystudy: 9.3%
  • Not metMCP Server Cardstudy: 0.0%
  • Not metA2A Agent Cardstudy: 0.0%
  • Not metWebMCP toolsstudy: 4.2%
  • Not metAgent Skills declaredstudy: 0.0%
What AI crawlers may read (robots.txt)

This website sets no rules for any AI crawler by name, like 84% of the websites whose rules we could read. Every AI crawler follows its general rules.

Training AI
  • GPTBotpartly
  • ClaudeBotpartly
  • Anthropic-AIpartly
  • Google-Extendedpartly
  • Applebot-Extendedpartly
  • Meta-ExternalAgentpartly
  • FacebookBotpartly
  • Bytespiderpartly
  • CCBotpartly
  • Diffbotpartly
  • Omgilibotpartly
AI search
  • OAI-SearchBotpartly
  • Claude-SearchBotpartly
  • PerplexityBotpartly
  • Applebotpartly
  • Amazonbotpartly
  • YouBotpartly
Answering questions
  • ChatGPT-Userpartly
  • Claude-Userpartly
  • Perplexity-Userpartly
  • DuckAssistBotpartly
  • MistralAI-Userpartly

Read from the website’s own rules file (robots.txt). An asterisk marks a crawler the file names. The rest follow its general rules. “Partly” means only some pages are blocked.

Websites the AI used as sources

How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
14
youtube.com
12
gao.gov
10
farmprogress.com
10
farmonaut.com
8
deere.com
7
haydenoutdoors.com
7
agcocorp.com (its own website)
6
ars.usda.gov
6
agriculture.newholland.com
6

In the study as US-listed.

Every question, and where the company came up (4 of 15)
QuestionOpenAIClaudePerplexityGemini
  • What to do if ISOBUS connectivity fails between tractor and implement?
  • Best machinery setups for sustainable no-till farming
  • How do tracked tractors compare to wheeled tractors for soil compaction and traction?
  • Recommended advanced technology solutions for precision farming operations
  • Do smart combine harvesters provide enough benefits to justify their cost for a commercial farm?
  • Alternatives to traditional tillage machinery for soil health improvement
  • What are the best agricultural equipment options for row crop farmers in the US?
  • Most reliable tractors for large-scale grain farms
  • Are autosteering systems helpful for mixed fleet farms in the Midwest?
  • Precision planting systems vs traditional planters: which is more efficient for yield optimization?
  • Common issues with precision farming sensors and how to fix them
  • Is investing in high-horsepower tractors worth it for mid-size farming operations?
  • What equipment works best for livestock and crop operations combined?
  • Differences between integrated and aftermarket precision ag technologies for farming equipment
  • What is the average price range for new self-propelled sprayers in the US?
named the companyanswered without naming itdid not answer

Columns, left to right: OpenAI, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini. The AI assistants often disagree. Across the study, on 40% of the questions where a company is named, only one of the four names it.

Share this result
Overall score 39 of 100 badge for AGCO

A badge of this result that you can show on your own website. Copy the code below.

<a href="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/agcocorp.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/agcocorp.com.svg" alt="Overall score 39 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>
Next step

Want AI assistants to name your company?

Book a 30-minute demo to see Rezolve Ai in action and what it can do for your business.

Request a demo