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

CPA.com

cpa.com

Accounting, tax and payrollFinancial technology and data

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 and 10, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
707 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
23rd of 32 accounting, tax and payroll companies
Closing balance

Named in

2of 60 answers

by 2 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for CPA.com

AI assistants rarely name this accounting, tax or payroll company, mentioning it in 2 out of 60 answers. Its overall score is 34 out of 100, ranking it 707th of 2,219 companies in the study, while the typical company in its sector has a score of 29. Its website passes 3 out of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned CPA.com by name. AI assistants named it in 2 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 223rd of 574 in its sector. The typical financial technology and data 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
34Overall score
  • Visibility4
  • Citations1
  • Sentiment95
  • Site quality73
  • AI readiness21
Summary of account
Named by AI in
3.3%
2 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
5.4%
of the mentions of it and its 5 peers
AI readiness
3/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
212 of 574
by overall score, where the typical financial technology and data company scores 29

Get the full report on CPA.com 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

CPA.com came up on 1 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01Cloud accounting solutions vs traditional on-premises systems for CPAs—what are the pros and cons?0/4
  2. 02Are integrated practice management tools worth the investment for growing accounting organizations?0/4
  3. 03Is there a significant cost difference between cloud practice management software and desktop alternatives for CPAs?0/4
  4. 04What resources are available for CPAs to keep up with digital innovation in advisory services?2/4
  5. 05Why do cloud-based tax solutions sometimes experience sync errors, and how can they be resolved?0/4
  6. 06What should accounting professionals consider before purchasing a digital advisory platform?0/4
  7. 07Options for standalone workflow automation tools in the United States accounting market?0/4
  8. 08Ways accounting professionals use workflow automation platforms for recurring financial tasks?0/4
  9. 09Best practice management platforms for mid-sized finance professionals in the United States?0/4
  10. 10What are the most effective digital solutions for accounting firms looking to streamline tax workflows?0/4
  11. 11How can accounting firms address data integration challenges with their advisory solutions?0/4
  12. 12Client advisory services versus tax automation tools: which offers more value to small accounting firms?0/4
  13. 13How can remote teams in accounting firms leverage technology for more efficient client collaboration?0/4
  14. 14Typical pricing models for digital accounting solutions aimed at small and medium firms?0/4
  15. 15What are strong alternatives to all-in-one accounting technology platforms for boutique firms?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 1/15Perplexity: 1/15Gemini: 0/15All assistants: 2/60
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

An answer that names the company

Claudenamed the company

“What resources are available for CPAs to keep up with digital innovation in advisory services?”

CPAs have several resources available to keep up with digital innovation in advisory services:

Professional Organizations & Conferences

CPA.com and the AICPA are committed to helping practitioners understand and maximize AI capabilities, offering award-winning AI toolkits and multi-part GenAI initiatives with tools and resources to support safe and strategic adoption. Additionally, Digital CPA conferences offer 50+ sessions on client advisory services (CAS), tax, audit, and artificial intelligence designed to keep professionals at the forefront of the accounting profession.

Educationa …

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. Xero (for Accounting Firms)
    51.4%
  2. Thomson Reuters (Tax & Accounting Professionals)
    21.6%
  3. Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting US
    13.5%
  4. Intuit Accountants
    8.1%
  5. CPA.com
    5.4%
  6. Right Networks
    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
    tax.thomsonreuters.com
    31
  2. 02
    wolterskluwer.com
    21
  3. 03
    financial-cents.com
    21
  4. 04
    taxdome.com
    13
  5. 05
    getuku.com
    9
  6. 06
    getcanopy.com
    9
  7. 07
    myfirm360.com
    7
  8. 08
    aicpa-cima.com
    7
  9. 09
    accountants.intuit.com
    6
  10. 10
    cpa.com (its own website)
    6

CPA.com is in the study as an accounting, tax or payroll company.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

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

How CPA.com 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
4

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

Citations
1

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

Sentiment
95

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
73

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.

Against its sectorSection 07

Compared with financial technology and data companies

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

Overall score
34
Ranks 212 of 574. Typical company: 29
Named in answers
3.3%
Ranks 223 of 574. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 401 of 574. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with accounting, tax and payroll companies

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

Overall score
34
Ranks 23 of 32. Typical company: 38
Named in answers
3.3%
Ranks 23 of 32. Typical company: 15.0%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 23 of 32. 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
Can an AI agent check out here?

Not by itself. CPA.com 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.txtNot present
  • WebMCPCould not check
Show every check, for your technical team
Discoverability
72 of 100
  • robots.txtPassed

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

    study: 86.1%
  • SitemapPartly met

    Serve an XML sitemap and reference it 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
0 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

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

    study: 6.2%
  • llms.txtNot met

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

    study: 31.0%
Bot access control
32 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPartly met

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

    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 24 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.cpa.com · 2,200 companies scanned

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

AI readinessSection 10

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

Content Accessibility

  • Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 7.4%
  • Not metllms.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%
  • 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 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

  • 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.

Take it with you

Get the full report on CPA.com 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