AI visibility statementFinance AI Visibility Study 2026Issued October 14, 2026

Account holder

DLA Piper

dlapiper.com

Law firms Advisers and services

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period: October 9 and 10, 2026; when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.: 734 of 2,219; its rank by overall score
Place in its category: 12th of 32 law firms

Closing balance

Named in

4of 60 answers

by 3 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for DLA Piper

AI assistants name this law firm in 6.7% of answers, while the typical company in its sector is named in 0% of answers. Its overall score is 33 out of 100, ranking 734th of 2,219 companies. The website passes 1 of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned DLA Piper by name. AI assistants named it in 4 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 62nd of 346 in its sector. The typical advisory or services firm is named in 0.0% of answers.

Overall score

Visibility9
Citations0
Sentiment75
Site quality87
AI readiness7

Summary of account

Named by AI in: 6.7%; 4 of 60 answers
Share of mentions: 13.3%; of the mentions of it and its 5 peers
AI readiness: 1/14; technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector: 101 of 346; by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on DLA Piper as a PDF

Enter your work email to download it.

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

Line items01

Every question, and where the company came up

DLA Piper came up on 2 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

01Best international corporate law firms for handling complex cross-border transactions0/4
02Options for corporations seeking legal advice without retaining a multinational law firm0/4
03Alternatives to using a single global firm for cross-border legal needs0/4
04How can enterprises benefit from unified legal counsel during cross-border mergers?0/4
05International law firms vs. regional firms for multinational M&A deals0/4
06Best legal solutions for organizations navigating international regulatory compliance0/4
07What are common challenges when working with multinational law firms and how can they be addressed?0/4
08Do integrated legal services offer better value for corporate clients than specialized firms?0/4
09Where can large businesses find trusted legal counsel for US and international growth?1/4
10What are the most reputable global law firms for corporations with operations in multiple countries?3/4
11How can a corporate client resolve communication issues with a global legal team?0/4
12How does a global law firm differ from a boutique corporate law practice?0/4
13What is the typical pricing structure for top-tier global law firms serving large organizations?0/4
14How do billing rates for multinational corporate legal services compare to domestic counsel?0/4
15Is hiring a large global legal team worth it for expanding into new markets?0/4

Total named1/151/150/152/154/60

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 detail02

What OpenAI actually said

An answer that names the company

OpenAInamed the company

“What are the most reputable global law firms for corporations with operations in multiple countries?”

… DLA Piper — wide cross‑border capability, strong regulatory and commercial work across US, UK, Europe, Asia.
Norton Rose Fulbright — strong in energy, infrastructure, financial institutions; excellent global regulatory and project work.
Hogan Lovells — strong regulatory, government/white‑collar, life sciences, and international arbitration; major presence in US, UK, Europe, Asia.
2) Elite U.S. corporate and transactional firms (strength in high‑value M&A, capital markets, private equity)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom — top for global M&A, capital markets, and complex cross‑bo …

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

Payees03

Where the mentions went

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

Also named

CompanyTimes named

01
Hogan Lovells
4
02
Baker McKenzie
4
03
Latham & Watkins
4
04
Jones Day
3
05
Norton Rose Fulbright
3

Share of mentions

CompanyShare

Baker McKenzie
23.3%
Latham & Watkins
23.3%
Hogan Lovells
16.7%
DLA Piper
13.3%
Jones Day
13.3%
Norton Rose Fulbright
10.0%

Referrers04

Websites the AI used as sources

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

01
chambers.com
9
02
legal.thomsonreuters.com
8
03
acc.com
7
04
gitnux.org
6
05
umbrex.com
4
06
dentons.com
4
07
thomsonreuters.com
4
08
axiomlaw.com
4
09
wolterskluwer.com
3
10
hklaw.com
3

DLA Piper is in the study as a law firm.

By assistant05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Gemini

2/15

Claude

1/15

OpenAI

1/15

Perplexity

0/15

Market comparison06

How DLA Piper 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

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

Citations

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

Sentiment

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness

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 sector07

Compared with advisory and services firms

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

Overall score

Ranks 101 of 346. Typical company: 27

Named in answers

6.7%

Ranks 62 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%

AI readiness

Ranks 323 of 346. Typical company: 29

Against its category08

Compared with law firms

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

Overall score

Ranks 12 of 32. Typical company: 28

Named in answers

6.7%

Ranks 6 of 32. Typical company: 0.8%

AI readiness

Ranks 31 of 32. Typical company: 21

AI agents09

Ready for AI agents

What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and pay through, on a scale of six levels.

0Not yet agent-ready
1Basic web presence
2Bot-aware
3Agent-readable
4Agent-integrated
5Agent-native

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. DLA Piper 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

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 DiscoveryNot present
Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.
study: 4.3%

Content accessibility

0 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.txtNot met
Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.
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 38 of 100 · 81% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · dlapiper.com · 2,200 companies scanned

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

AI readiness10

The checks behind the AI readiness score

1 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

Not metrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.1%
Not metXML 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%

Take it with you

Get the full report on DLA Piper 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

Share11

Share this result

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/finance/dlapiper.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/dlapiper.com.svg" alt="Overall score 33 of 100, Finance AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>

End of statement

All 2,219 companies How we measured this

DLA Piper

What this means for DLA Piper

Get the full report on DLA Piper as a PDF

Every question, and where the company came up

What OpenAI actually said

Where the mentions went

Also named

Share of mentions

Websites the AI used as sources

Which AI assistants named the company

How DLA Piper compares with all 2,219 companies

What makes up the score

Compared with advisory and services firms

Compared with law firms

Ready for AI agents

The checks behind the AI readiness score

Discoverability

Content Accessibility

Bot Access Control

API / Auth / MCP

Get the full report on DLA Piper as a PDF

Share this result

Want AI assistants to name your company?