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.

Back to the study
AI visibility statementFinance AI Visibility Study 2026Issued October 14, 2026
Account holder
Statement period
October 9 and 10, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
1,783 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
48th of 62 consumer lenders
Closing balance

Named in

0of 60, its tower is dark

by 0 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Fairsquare

AI assistants do not name this consumer lender in any of their 60 answers. Its overall score is 25 out of 100, ranking 1,783rd of 2,219 overall and 73rd of 93 in its sector. The website passes 2 of 14 technical checks measuring how ready it is for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Fairsquare by name. AI assistants named it in none of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 56th of 93 in its sector. The typical lending and credit company is named in 3.3% 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
25Overall score
  • Visibility0
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness14
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
2/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
73 of 93
by overall score, where the typical lending and credit company scores 31

Get the full report on Fairsquare 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

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

  1. 01What are some non-digital alternatives to online small business financing platforms?0/4
  2. 02Is it worth using a digital small business financing platform instead of applying with a local bank?0/4
  3. 03What type of financing solution is best for purchasing new equipment for a small business?0/4
  4. 04Online financing platforms vs community bank loans for small business owners?0/4
  5. 05Are alternative financing platforms a good choice for small businesses with limited credit history?0/4
  6. 06Top options for US-based entrepreneurs seeking innovative small business funding?0/4
  7. 07What fees should I expect when using digital platforms for small business funding?0/4
  8. 08How does a small business financing platform differ from traditional bank loans?0/4
  9. 09How can innovative finance platforms help seasonal businesses manage cash flow?0/4
  10. 10Common mistakes to avoid when applying for small business financing online?0/4
  11. 11How do interest rates typically compare on small business financing platforms vs traditional banks?0/4
  12. 12Which financing solutions support rapid growth for small businesses?0/4
  13. 13Why was my application for small business financing declined, and how can I improve my chances?0/4
  14. 14What are the best small business financing platforms for startups in the US?0/4
  15. 15What are the main differences between invoice factoring and revenue-based financing for small 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 Gemini actually said

The company is not named in this answer

Geminidid not name the company

“Top options for US-based entrepreneurs seeking innovative small business funding?”

For US-based entrepreneurs seeking innovative small business funding, several alternative options offer faster approvals, more flexible structures, and different qualification criteria compared to traditional bank loans. These options often focus on revenue, assets, and cash flow rather than solely on credit scores.

Top innovative funding options include:

SBA Loans: While technically offered through banks and credit unions, Small Business Administration (SBA) loans are partially guaranteed by the U.S. government, reducing lender risk and potentially offering lower rates and longer te …

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
    OnDeck
    4
  2. 02
    Lendio
    3
  3. 03
    BlueVine
    2
  4. 04
    Funding Circle
    1

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. OnDeck
    33.3%
  2. BlueVine
    33.3%
  3. Lendio
    25.0%
  4. Funding Circle
    8.3%
  5. Fairsquare
    0.0%
  6. National Funding
    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
    crestmontcapital.com
    25
  2. 02
    biz2credit.com
    20
  3. 03
    bankrate.com
    17
  4. 04
    uschamber.com
    15
  5. 05
    nerdwallet.com
    14
  6. 06
    sofi.com
    13
  7. 07
    forbes.com
    10
  8. 08
    forafinancial.com
    9
  9. 09
    ecapital.com
    8
  10. 10
    bluevine.com
    8

Fairsquare is in the study as a consumer lender.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

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

How Fairsquare 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
80

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
14

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 lending and credit companies

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

Overall score
25
Ranks 73 of 93. Typical company: 31
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 56 of 93. Typical company: 3.3%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 76 of 93. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with consumer lenders

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

Overall score
25
Ranks 45 of 62. Typical company: 28
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 34 of 62. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 51 of 62. 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 0: Not yet agent-ready. Agents struggle to find basic information about the site.

To reach level 1:
  • 2 of robots.txt, Sitemap, Link headers
Can an AI agent check out here?

We could not tell. The website turned away our requests for the files an agent would read. An agent arriving by itself is turned away the same way.

Agent payment protocols
  • x402Not present
  • MPPNot present
  • AP2Not present
  • ACPCould not check
  • UCPCould not check
Interfaces for AI agents
  • MCP Server CardCould not check
  • A2A Agent CardCould not check
  • Agent SkillsCould not check
  • API CatalogCould not check
  • llms.txtNot present
  • WebMCPCould not check
Show every check, for your technical team
Discoverability
31 of 100
  • robots.txtNot met

    Publish a valid robots.txt with crawl rules and a Sitemap line.

    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
0 of 100
  • AI bot rulesNot 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 AuthCould not check

    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 CatalogCould not check

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

    study: 1.3%
  • OAuth discoveryCould not check

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

    study: 6.3%
  • OAuth Protected ResourceCould not check

    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 CardCould not check

    Offer an MCP server and publish its server card under /.well-known.

    study: 0.8%
  • A2A Agent CardCould not check

    Publish an agent card at /.well-known/agent-card.json.

    study: 0.2%
  • Agent SkillsCould not check

    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 manifestCould not check

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

    study: 0.2%

Score 11 of 100 · 65% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.fairsquare.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

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 checks

Discoverability

  • Not metrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.1%
  • Not metXML sitemapstudy: 79.4%
  • PassedHTTP 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 Fairsquare 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

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