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

Compass Labs

compasslabs.ai

Stablecoins and digital asset infrastructureCrypto and digital assets

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 13, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
444 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
19th of 80 digital asset infrastructure companies
Closing balance

Named in

1of 60 answers

by 1 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Compass Labs

AI assistants rarely name Compass Labs, with just 1 out of 60 answers mentioning the digital asset infrastructure company. Its overall score is 38 out of 100, ranking 444th of 2,219 companies and 21st of 102 in its sector. The company’s website passes 5 of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Compass Labs by name. AI assistants named it in 1 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 50th of 102 in its sector. The typical crypto and digital asset company is named in 1.7% 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
38Overall score
  • Visibility6
  • Citations2
  • Sentiment100
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness36
Summary of account
Named by AI in
1.7%
1 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
33.3%
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
21 of 102
by overall score, where the typical crypto and digital asset company scores 30

Get the full report on Compass Labs 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

Compass Labs came up on 1 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01What options exist besides SDK-based solutions for integrating stablecoin lending and yield features into financial apps?0/4
  2. 02Is it worth using a dedicated API for yield and lending products versus building in-house?0/4
  3. 03What are practical use cases for tokenized assets in digital wealth management platforms?0/4
  4. 04How does stablecoin yield infrastructure compare to traditional savings APIs for fintech apps?0/4
  5. 05How do API providers for stablecoin yield and tokenized assets typically structure their pricing for fintech businesses?0/4
  6. 06Are there API solutions for lending and earning that offer tiered pricing or usage-based models for startups?0/4
  7. 07How do you troubleshoot integration issues with stablecoin yield APIs in a fintech development environment?0/4
  8. 08What are common obstacles when connecting non-custodial lending infrastructure to a finance platform?0/4
  9. 09Which platforms offer similar features to non-custodial APIs for tokenized asset management?0/4
  10. 10How can financial institutions quickly launch tokenized asset investment products using API infrastructure?0/4
  11. 11What are some alternatives to API-driven stablecoin yield infrastructure for launching digital investment products?0/4
  12. 12What are the benefits of leveraging API-based tokenized asset solutions for new digital investment offerings?0/4
  13. 13How can a fintech app enable users to earn yield on stablecoins using embedded infrastructure?0/4
  14. 14What are the best non-custodial APIs for integrating stablecoin yield into fintech platforms?1/4
  15. 15What’s the difference between non-custodial lending APIs and direct blockchain smart contract integrations for digital assets?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 0/15Perplexity: 1/15Gemini: 0/15All assistants: 1/60
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 Perplexity actually said

An answer that names the company

Perplexitynamed the company

“What are the best non-custodial APIs for integrating stablecoin yield into fintech platforms?”

The strongest options to shortlist are Yield.xyz, Compass Labs, Coinchange, and—if you want to build closer to protocols—direct integrations with Aave, Morpho, or Kamino. For most fintechs, the best fit depends less on headline APY than on custody model, supported chains, liquidity, compliance, and operational controls.

Provider · Best for · Why it stands out · Key diligence points

Yield.xyz · Multi-chain wallets, neobanks, and embedded finance · Positions itself as a non-custodial yield API and supports a broad set of protocols, chains, and stablec …

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.

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. Compass Labs
    33.3%
  2. Circle Yield API
    33.3%
  3. Zero Hash
    33.3%
  4. Vesta Equity
    0.0%
  5. Stellar API (by Stellar.org)
    0.0%
  6. Prime Trust API
    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
    investax.io
    13
  2. 02
    rebelfi.io
    13
  3. 03
    upshift.finance
    11
  4. 04
    f6s.com
    9
  5. 05
    fintechspecs.com
    8
  6. 06
    pwc.com
    6
  7. 07
    docs.yield.xyz
    5
  8. 08
    mckinsey.com
    4
  9. 09
    stablecoininsider.org
    4
  10. 10
    walletinvestor.com
    4

Compass Labs is in the study as a digital asset infrastructure company.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Perplexity
1/15
Claude
0/15
Gemini
0/15
OpenAI
0/15
Market comparisonSection 06

How Compass Labs 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
6

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

Citations
2

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

Sentiment
100

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
80

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 crypto and digital asset companies

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

Overall score
38
Ranks 21 of 102. Typical company: 30
Named in answers
1.7%
Ranks 50 of 102. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 21 of 102. Typical company: 33
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with digital asset infrastructure companies

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

Overall score
38
Ranks 14 of 80. Typical company: 29
Named in answers
1.7%
Ranks 37 of 80. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 16 of 80. Typical company: 36
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 2: Bot-aware. Explicit AI bot rules and declared Content Signals.

To reach level 3:
  • Markdown negotiation
Can an AI agent check out here?

Not by itself. Compass Labs 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 CardPublished
  • A2A Agent CardNot present
  • Agent SkillsNot present
  • API CatalogNot present
  • llms.txtPublished
  • WebMCPCould not check
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: 86.1%
  • SitemapPassed

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

    study: 87.9%
  • Link headersNot met

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

    study: 1.5%
  • DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present

    Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.

    study: 4.3%
Content accessibility
50 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

    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
68 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPartly met

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

    study: 92.7%
  • Content SignalsPassed

    Content-Signal lines in robots.txt declaring search, AI input and AI training preferences.

    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
18 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 CardPartly 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 50 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.compasslabs.ai · 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

  • Not metExplicit 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%
  • PassedMCP 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 no rules for any AI crawler by name, like 86% 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.

Take it with you

Get the full report on Compass Labs 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