Of 60 answers

The most named companies in the study, and S&P 500 financials, with how many of their 60 AI answers named them.

SWIFT47/60TRANSUNION46/60EXPERIAN42/60COINSTAR41/60NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION41/60ZELLE41/60BLOOMBERG L.P.38/60TRADINGVIEW38/60BANCO POPULAR DE PUERTO RICO37/60PAYPAL37/60VENMO37/60CHEXSYSTEMS33/60EQUIFAX33/60MORNINGSTAR32/60S&P GLOBAL31/60ALPACA MARKETS30/60COINBASE30/60PINWHEEL29/60STRIPE29/60XERO29/60ACORNS28/60AFFIRM28/60PAYFAST (PAYGATE)28/60PAYONEER28/60INTERACTIVE BROKERS26/60CHARLES SCHWAB19/60THE HARTFORD9/60MOODY'S21/60CME GROUP19/60ACCENTURE11/60CHUBB10/60MORGAN STANLEY6/60AMERICAN EXPRESS14/60SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL12/60FACTSET20/60NASDAQ19/60ALLSTATE11/60WELLS FARGO18/60PAYCHEX10/60ARES MANAGEMENT3/60
Rezolve Ai
MethodDemo
Back to the study
AI visibility statementFinance AI Visibility Study 2026Issued October 14, 2026
Account holder

Appmax

appmax.com.br

Payment processors, acquirers and point of saleCards and payments

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
1,493 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
122nd of 203 payment processors
Closing balance

Named in

0of 60, its tower is dark

by 0 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Appmax

AI assistants do not name this payment processor in any of their 60 answers, while often mentioning Stripe, Adyen, or Braintree. Its overall score is 26 out of 100, placing it 1,493rd of 2,219 companies, close to the typical company in its sector. The website passes 5 of 14 technical checks for readiness with AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Appmax by name. AI assistants named it in none of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 179th of 375 in its sector. The typical cards and payments company is named in 0.0% of answers.

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 peers.

Overall score
26Overall score
  • Visibility0
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality73
  • AI readiness36
Summary of account
Named by AI in
0.0%
0 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
0.0%
of the mentions of it and its 5 peers
AI readiness
5/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
229 of 375
by overall score, where the typical cards and payments company scores 27

Get the full report on Appmax as a PDF

Enter your work email to download it.

We’ll use your email to follow up about this report. Privacy policy

Line itemsSection 01

Every question, and where the company came up

Appmax came up on 0 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01How do you address frequent false positives in fraud screening on payment platforms?0/4
  2. 02What can cause low payment approval rates in e-commerce transactions and how can platforms help fix this?0/4
  3. 03Top payment solutions with built-in fraud prevention for US online retailers0/4
  4. 04Are there payment processors for online stores with no setup fees and flat monthly rates?0/4
  5. 05What are some low-cost options for e-commerce payment processing with good fraud protection?0/4
  6. 06Typical pricing models for US e-commerce payment processing platforms0/4
  7. 07Alternatives to traditional payment gateways for accepting online payments in e-commerce0/4
  8. 08Is it worth switching to a payment platform focused on high conversion rates for US online shops?0/4
  9. 09What's the best way for an online retailer to recover failed transactions using payment platform tools?0/4
  10. 10Are advanced sales recovery features worth the higher fees on e-commerce payment systems?0/4
  11. 11Which payment processors work best for e-commerce businesses selling digital products in the US?0/4
  12. 12What are the best online payment platforms for e-commerce businesses looking for high approval rates?0/4
  13. 13How does an integrated e-commerce payment processor compare to using separate gateway and checkout solutions?0/4
  14. 14E-commerce payment platforms vs. traditional merchant accounts: pros and cons for online stores0/4
  15. 15What are the top alternatives to standard e-commerce payment processors for high-risk businesses?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 0/15Perplexity: 0/15Gemini: 0/15All assistants: 0/60
named the companyanswered without naming itdid not answer

Columns, left to right: OpenAI, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini. Across the study, on 50% of the questions where a company is named, only one AI assistant names it.

Transaction detailSection 02

What Claude actually said

The company is not named in this answer

Claudedid not name the company

“Top payment solutions with built-in fraud prevention for US online retailers”

Based on current market data, here are the top payment solutions with built-in fraud prevention for US online retailers:

Enterprise & E-commerce Platforms

Forter

Offers guaranteed fraud protection with decisioning, instant transaction approvals or rejections for minimal customer friction, and seamless integration with leading e-commerce platforms. It has enhanced integration with Shopify and expanded its fraud guarantee to cover new payment methods.

Sift

A leading AI‑driven fraud detection platform trusted by global brands to stop payment fraud, account takeovers, and fake user a …

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

PayeesSection 03

Where the mentions went

The companies these answers named, and how the mentions were split between this company and its peers.

Named instead

CompanyTimes named
  1. 01
    Stripe
    28
  2. 02
    Adyen
    10
  3. 03
    Braintree
    10
  4. 04
    Authorize.net
    1

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. Stripe
    48.7%
  2. Adyen
    19.2%
  3. Braintree
    16.7%
  4. Authorize.net
    14.1%
  5. 2Checkout (now Verifone)
    1.3%
  6. Appmax
    0.0%
ReferrersSection 04

Websites the AI used as sources

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

  1. 01
    luqra.com
    14
  2. 02
    getholdings.com
    7
  3. 03
    stripe.com
    6
  4. 04
    airwallex.com
    6
  5. 05
    nerdwallet.com
    6
  6. 06
    checkoutchamp.com
    5
  7. 07
    paypal.com
    4
  8. 08
    checkout.com
    4
  9. 09
    learn.g2.com
    4
  10. 10
    whop.com
    4

Appmax is in the study as a payment processor.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Claude
0/15
Gemini
0/15
OpenAI
0/15
Perplexity
0/15
Market comparisonSection 06

How Appmax compares with all 2,219 companies

Every tower is a company in the study, taller for a higher overall score and lit where AI assistants named it. Its own group stays lit. Hover a tower to see it, and click to open it.

What makes up the score

Each part is scored out of 100.

Visibility
0

How often AI assistants name the company, and how that compares with its peers

Citations
0

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

Sentiment
50

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
73

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
36

How easily AI tools can read and use the website

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

Against its sectorSection 07

Compared with cards and payments companies

375 companies in this sector. The gold tick on each bar is the typical company.

Overall score
26
Ranks 229 of 375. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 179 of 375. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 41 of 375. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with payment processors

203 companies in this category. The gold tick on each bar is the typical company.

Overall score
26
Ranks 115 of 203. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 91 of 203. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 23 of 203. Typical company: 29
AI agentsSection 09

Ready for AI agents

What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and pay through, 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

The website turns away requests that do not come from a browser. AI agents that say what they are meet the same refusal.

Can an AI agent check out here?

Not by itself. Appmax publishes none of the agent payment protocols we look for. An agent would have to click through the website like a person.

Agent payment protocols
  • x402Not present
  • MPPNot present
  • AP2Not present
  • ACPNot present
  • UCPNot present
Interfaces for AI agents
  • MCP Server CardNot present
  • A2A Agent CardNot present
  • Agent SkillsNot present
  • API CatalogNot present
  • llms.txtPublished
  • WebMCPCould not check
Show every check, for your technical team
Discoverability
100 of 100
  • robots.txtPassed

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

    study: 86.1%
  • SitemapPassed

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

    study: 87.9%
  • Link headersCould not check

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

    study: 1.5%
  • DNS for AI DiscoveryPassed

    SVCB or HTTPS records under _agents that advertise agent endpoints.

    study: 4.3%
Content accessibility
100 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationCould not check

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

    study: 6.2%
  • llms.txtPassed

    An llms.txt that tells language models what the site offers.

    study: 31.0%
Bot access control
63 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPassed

    Explicit robots.txt rules for AI crawlers such as GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot.

    study: 92.7%
  • Content SignalsNot met

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

    study: 2.3%
  • Web Bot AuthNot present

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

    study: 0.3%
APIs, auth and MCP
0 of 100
  • API CatalogNot met

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

    study: 1.3%
  • OAuth discoveryNot met

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

    study: 6.3%
  • OAuth Protected ResourceNot met

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

    study: 5.3%
  • 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: 0.8%
  • 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: 1.0%
  • WebMCPCould not check

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

    study: 0.0%
  • ARD manifestNot met

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

    study: 0.2%

Score 53 of 100 · 81% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · appmax.com.br · 2,200 companies scanned

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

AI readinessSection 10

The checks behind the AI readiness score

5 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: 85.1%
  • PassedXML sitemapstudy: 79.4%
  • Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 42.5%

Content Accessibility

  • Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 7.4%
  • Passedllms.txt publishedstudy: 28.1%
  • PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 97.3%

Bot Access Control

  • PassedExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 11.5%

API / Auth / MCP

  • Not metAPI Catalog (.well-known/api-catalog)study: 1.1%
  • Not metOAuth Authorization Server discoverystudy: 5.2%
  • Not metOAuth Protected Resource discoverystudy: 4.6%
  • Not metMCP Server Cardstudy: 0.2%
  • Not metA2A Agent Cardstudy: 0.0%
  • Not metWebMCP toolsstudy: 0.3%
  • Not metAgent Skills declaredstudy: 0.1%
AI crawlersSection 11

What AI crawlers may read (robots.txt)

This website sets rules for 10 AI crawlers by name. All others follow its general rules.

Training AI

  • GPTBot*allowed
  • ClaudeBot*allowed
  • Anthropic-AIallowed
  • Google-Extended*allowed
  • Applebot-Extendedallowed
  • Meta-ExternalAgentallowed
  • FacebookBotallowed
  • Bytespiderallowed
  • CCBot*allowed
  • Diffbotallowed
  • Omgilibotallowed

AI search

  • OAI-SearchBot*allowed
  • Claude-SearchBot*allowed
  • PerplexityBot*allowed
  • Applebotallowed
  • Amazonbotallowed
  • YouBotallowed

Answering questions

  • ChatGPT-User*allowed
  • Claude-User*allowed
  • Perplexity-User*allowed
  • 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.

Take it with you

Get the full report on Appmax as a PDF

Every number on this page in a PDF you can keep and share with your team. Enter your work email to download it.

We’ll use your email to follow up about this report. Privacy policy

End of statement
All 2,219 companiesHow we measured this
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