Back to the study

CHS

chsinc.com · Consumer goods · CHSCP

Ranked 1,079 of 2,047 companies in the study

32Overall score
  • Visibility7
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment75
  • Site quality73
  • AI readiness29
What this means for CHS

AI assistants rarely name CHS, mentioning the company in 2 out of 60 answers. CHS has an overall score of 32 out of 100, ranking 1,079th of 2,047 companies. Its website passes 4 out of 14 technical checks for readiness with AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about the consumer goods market: none named CHS. AI assistants named it in 2 of 60 answers (3.3%). The typical consumer goods company is named in 3.3% of answers. By how often it is named, CHS ranks 56 of 118 in its sector.

Named fewer than three times in total. Read this as a sign that AI assistants rarely bring this company up, not as an exact comparison with its rivals.

Named by AI in
3.3%
2 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
11.8%
compared with 5 rivals
AI readiness
4/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 3
Rank in its sector
41 of 118
by overall score, where the typical consumer goods company scores 30
How CHS 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
7

How often AI assistants name the company

Citations
0

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

Sentiment
75

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
73

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
29

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 consumer goods

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

Overall score32
Ranks 41 of 118. Typical company: 30
Named in answers3%
Ranks 56 of 118. Typical company: 3%
AI readiness29
Ranks 24 of 118. Typical company: 21
What Gemini actually said

An answer that names the company

“What are the best cooperatives for accessing crop protection products in the Midwest?”

In the Midwest, several cooperatives provide crop protection products and services to farmers. These co-ops often offer tailored solutions, agronomic expertise, and a range of products from various manufacturers.

Some of the best cooperatives for accessing crop protection products in the Midwest include:

Five Star Cooperative Their Crop Performance lineup includes crop protection solutions designed for Midwest conditions. They offer products from manufacturers like Syngenta, Bayer, Corteva, BASF, and FMC, many of which are tested in local fields. Five Star Cooperative also has its ex …

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

Share of mentions

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

Growmark
41.7%
Land O'Lakes (WinField United)
25.0%
CHS
16.7%
Agtegra Cooperative
16.7%
Ag Processing Inc (AGP)
0.0%
Cenex Harvest States (part of Nationwide CHS energy brand)
0.0%
Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Gemini
1/15
OpenAI
1/15
Perplexity
0/15
Claude
0/15
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.chsinc.com · 2,047 companies scanned

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

The checks behind the AI readiness score

4 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%
  • PassedHTTP 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
  • GPTBotallowed
  • ClaudeBotallowed
  • Anthropic-AIallowed
  • Google-Extendedallowed
  • Applebot-Extendedallowed
  • Meta-ExternalAgentallowed
  • FacebookBotallowed
  • Bytespiderallowed
  • CCBotallowed
  • Diffbotallowed
  • Omgilibotallowed
AI search
  • OAI-SearchBotallowed
  • Claude-SearchBotallowed
  • PerplexityBotallowed
  • Applebotallowed
  • Amazonbotallowed
  • YouBotallowed
Answering questions
  • ChatGPT-Userallowed
  • Claude-Userallowed
  • Perplexity-Userallowed
  • DuckAssistBotallowed
  • MistralAI-Userallowed

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

rd.usda.gov
40
eos.com
13
fb.org
11
fivestarcoop.com
9
keycoop.com
8
openknowledge.fao.org
8
ncbaclusa.coop
6
farmstandapp.com
6
en.wikipedia.org
6
farmbrite.com
6

In the study as Consumer brands.

Every question, and where the company came up (1 of 15)
QuestionOpenAIClaudePerplexityGemini
  • What’s the difference between agricultural cooperatives and private agribusinesses for crop input supplies?
  • How are cooperative dividends calculated and distributed to farmer-members in the U.S.?
  • How can I resolve payment or delivery issues with my cooperative’s energy services?
  • Where can agricultural producers find grain marketing services aside from cooperatives?
  • What factors affect the cost of bulk crop inputs purchased through a cooperative?
  • Is joining an agribusiness cooperative for bulk fertilizer purchases worth it for small family farms?
  • What are some alternatives to farmer-owned cooperatives for sourcing farm inputs?
  • What are the best cooperatives for accessing crop protection products in the Midwest?
  • Cooperative grain elevators vs independently-operated elevators—how do they compare for farmers?
  • What services do cooperatives provide for livestock producers needing feed and nutrition solutions?
  • What should new farmers know about joining a regional agribusiness cooperative in the United States?
  • How do cooperatives support growers with risk management solutions for fluctuating grain prices?
  • Do agricultural energy co-ops offer better fuel pricing for farmers than commercial retailers?
  • How can farmer-owned cooperatives help with grain marketing and storage?
  • What should I do if my crop input order through a cooperative is delayed during busy season?
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.

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