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

Financial Technology Partners

ftpartners.com

Investment banks and capital marketsInvesting and wealth

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
464 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
5th of 27 investment banks
Closing balance

Named in

9of 60 answers

by 4 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Financial Technology Partners

AI assistants name Financial Technology Partners in 15% of answers, which is much more often than the typical company in its sector at 0.8%. Its overall score is 37 out of 100, ranking 464th of 2,219 companies. The website passes 3 out of 14 technical checks for being ready for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Financial Technology Partners by name. AI assistants named it in 9 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 21st of 238 in its sector. The typical investing and wealth company is named in 0.8% of answers.

Overall score
37Overall score
  • Visibility30
  • Citations5
  • Sentiment67
  • Site quality67
  • AI readiness21
Summary of account
Named by AI in
15.0%
9 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
75.0%
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
43 of 238
by overall score, where the typical investing and wealth company scores 28

Get the full report on Financial Technology Partners 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

Financial Technology Partners came up on 5 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01Common challenges FinTech entrepreneurs face when working with investment bankers0/4
  2. 02Typical process for financial technology firms seeking IPO advisory services from specialized investment banks0/4
  3. 03How does working with a FinTech-focused investment bank differ from partnering with a generalist investment bank?0/4
  4. 04Ways to find trusted investment bankers with experience in the financial technology industry in the US2/4
  5. 05Is using an investment bank specializing in FinTech worth it for an early-stage financial technology company?0/4
  6. 06How much should a FinTech startup expect to pay in advisory fees for capital raising services?0/4
  7. 07Alternatives to using investment banking services for financial technology companies seeking funding0/4
  8. 08What should financial technology founders look for when choosing an investment banking partner?1/4
  9. 09What are the typical fee structures for investment banking services in the FinTech sector?0/4
  10. 10Why might a FinTech company struggle to close funding rounds even with the help of a specialized investment bank?0/4
  11. 11Best investment banking options for startups in the financial technology sector looking to raise capital4/4
  12. 12What other advisory options exist for FinTech firms beyond investment banking services?0/4
  13. 13What are the main services offered by investment banks that focus exclusively on FinTech companies?0/4
  14. 14How can a FinTech-focused investment bank help with mergers and acquisitions in the financial technology space?1/4
  15. 15Advantages of boutique investment banks specializing in financial technology versus large traditional banks1/4
Total namedOpenAI: 1/15Claude: 2/15Perplexity: 1/15Gemini: 5/15All assistants: 9/60
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

An answer that names the company

Gemininamed the company

“Ways to find trusted investment bankers with experience in the financial technology industry in the US”

To find trusted investment bankers with experience in the financial technology (fintech) industry in the US, consider the following approaches:

1. Focus on Specialized Fintech Investment Banks:

FT Partners (Financial Technology Partners): This firm is exclusively focused on the financial technology sector and is recognized as a dominant fintech-specialist investment bank globally. They have offices in San Francisco, New York, and Miami. FT Partners has been involved in numerous significant fintech deals and publishes industry-defining research.

2. Look at Investment Bankin …

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. Financial Technology Partners
    75.0%
  2. Moelis & Company - FinTech Group
    16.7%
  3. Jefferies – Financial Institutions Group (FinTech)
    8.3%
  4. KeyBanc Capital Markets – Financial Technology Investment Banking
    0.0%
  5. RBC Capital Markets – FinTech Investment Banking
    0.0%
  6. William Blair – Financial Technology Investment Banking
    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
    ftpartners.com (its own website)
    11
  2. 02
    windsordrake.com
    9
  3. 03
    linkedin.com
    6
  4. 04
    papermark.com
    5
  5. 05
    rho.co
    5
  6. 06
    axial.net
    5
  7. 07
    capstonepartners.com
    4
  8. 08
    preplounge.com
    4
  9. 09
    jpmorgan.com
    4
  10. 10
    en.wikipedia.org
    3

Financial Technology Partners is in the study as an investment bank.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Gemini
5/15
Claude
2/15
OpenAI
1/15
Perplexity
1/15
Market comparisonSection 06

How Financial Technology Partners 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
30

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

Citations
5

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

Sentiment
67

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
67

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 investing and wealth companies

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

Overall score
37
Ranks 43 of 238. Typical company: 28
Named in answers
15.0%
Ranks 21 of 238. Typical company: 0.8%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 140 of 238. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with investment banks

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

Overall score
37
Ranks 5 of 27. Typical company: 29
Named in answers
15.0%
Ranks 2 of 27. Typical company: 5.0%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 20 of 27. 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. Financial Technology Partners 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
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
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 25 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · ftpartners.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 Financial Technology Partners 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

ShareSection 12

Share this result

Overall score 37 of 100 badge for Financial Technology Partners

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/ftpartners.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/ftpartners.com.svg" alt="Overall score 37 of 100, Finance AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>
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