- Visibility8
- Citations1
- Sentiment63
- Site quality80
- AI readiness14
AI assistants name CorVel in 6.7% of answers, which is more often than the typical company in its group at 3.3%. CorVel has an overall score of 30 out of 100, ranking 1,218th of 2,047 companies. Its website passes 2 out of 14 technical checks for AI tools.
We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market: none named CorVel. AI assistants named it in 4 of 60 answers (6.7%). The typical company in its group is named in 3.3% of answers. By how often it is named, CorVel ranks 24 of 61 in its sector.
Every dot is a company in the study. Hover one to see it; click to open its report.
This companySame sectorEvery other companyNever named
Five parts, each scored out of 100.
How often AI assistants name the company
How often AI uses the company's own website as a source
How positively AI describes the company
How well built the website's own pages are
How easily AI tools can read and use the website
Visibility is calculated from the answers on this page. How the score is built.
61 companies in this sector. The line on each bar is the typical company.
An answer that names the company
“What are the most reliable workers' compensation claims management solutions for employers?”
For employers seeking reliable workers' compensation claims management solutions, several options offer robust features and proven track records. These generally fall into two main categories: Third-Party Administrators (TPAs) and specialized claims management software.
Third-Party Administrators (TPAs)
TPAs are independent companies that manage insurance claims and benefits on behalf of insurers or self-funded employers. They handle everything from claim intake to resolution, and many specialize in workers' compensation.
Some of the most prominent and reliable TPAs for workers' compens …
The AI’s answer as we received it, shortened and not checked for accuracy.
How the mentions in these answers were split between this company and its rivals
Answers naming it, out of answers received
What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and buy from, on a scale of six levels.
- 0
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Level 0: Not yet agent-ready. Agents struggle to find basic information about the site.
- 2 of robots.txt, Sitemap, Link headers
Show every check, for your technical teamHide the checks
- study: 92.0%robots.txtPassed
A valid robots.txt with crawl rules at the site root.
- study: 86.8%SitemapNot met
Serve an XML sitemap and reference it from robots.txt.
- study: 0.3%Link headersNot met
Send Link headers such as rel="api-catalog" or rel="describedby" on the homepage.
- study: 5.5%DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present
Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.
- study: 1.9%Markdown negotiationNot met
Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.
- study: 25.1%llms.txtNot met
Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.
- study: 93.4%AI bot rulesPartly met
Add explicit robots.txt groups for the main AI crawlers.
- study: 1.4%Content SignalsNot met
Add a Content-Signal line for search, ai-input and ai-train to robots.txt.
- study: 0.2%Web Bot AuthNot present
Only relevant if you run your own agents or crawlers: publish a signing key directory.
- study: 0.3%API CatalogNot met
List public APIs in a linkset at /.well-known/api-catalog.
- study: 11.8%OAuth discoveryNot met
Publish OpenID Connect or OAuth server metadata under /.well-known.
- study: 10.3%OAuth Protected ResourceNot met
Serve protected resource metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource.
- study: 0.0%auth.mdNot met
Publish an auth.md describing how agents sign in.
- study: 0.2%MCP Server CardNot met
Offer an MCP server and publish its server card under /.well-known.
- study: 0.1%A2A Agent CardNot met
Publish an agent card at /.well-known/agent-card.json.
- study: 0.2%Agent SkillsNot met
Publish a skills index with the main tasks agents can do.
- study: 33.7%WebMCPCould not check
Register key actions such as search or cart as WebMCP tools.
- study: 0.1%ARD manifestNot met
Publish an ai-catalog.json listing every agent interface.
Score 16 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.corvel.com · 2,047 companies scanned
2 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 checksHide them
- Passedrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.0%
- Not metXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
- Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 29.0%
- Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 8.3%
- Not metllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
- PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
- Not metExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 13.0%
- 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%
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.
- GPTBotallowed
- ClaudeBotallowed
- Anthropic-AIallowed
- Google-Extendedallowed
- Applebot-Extendedallowed
- Meta-ExternalAgentallowed
- FacebookBotallowed
- Bytespiderallowed
- CCBotallowed
- Diffbotallowed
- Omgilibotallowed
- OAI-SearchBotallowed
- Claude-SearchBotallowed
- PerplexityBotallowed
- Applebotallowed
- Amazonbotallowed
- YouBotallowed
- 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.
How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers
In the study as US-listed.
- How does workers' compensation claims management differ from liability claims management?
- What are the most reliable workers' compensation claims management solutions for employers?
- Who provides immediate medical guidance services for workplace injuries in the US?
- How are fees structured for liability claims administration services?
- Third-party administrator vs. self-administration for workplace injury claims
- What should employers look for when choosing a claims management provider?
- Alternatives to using a third-party administrator for workplace claims handling
- Best options for liability claims administration for self-insured organizations in the US
- Is it worth investing in end-to-end risk management for workplace claims?
- What to do if medical bill review is disputed in a liability claim?
- How do technology platforms improve the efficiency of managing workers' compensation claims?
- What factors influence the cost of workers' compensation claims management in the US?
- What are effective options besides traditional claims management for liability risk?
- How can organizations address delays in workers' compensation claim processing?
- Ways organizations can reduce risk and speed up employee recovery after workplace injury
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.
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/corvel.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/corvel.com.svg" alt="Overall score 30 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>