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

Account holder

Gartner

gartner.comIT

Research, news and media Advisers and services

Money20/20 attendee S&P 500

Also in the US AI Visibility Study

Statement period: September 23 to 25, 2026; when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.: 670 of 2,219; its rank by overall score
Place in its category: 29th of 73 research and media companies

Closing balance

Named in

10of 60 answers

by 4 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Gartner

AI assistants name Gartner in 16.7% of answers, while the typical company in its sector is not named in any. Its overall score is 34 out of 100, which ranks 670th of 2,219. The website passes 1 out of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Gartner by name. AI assistants named it in 10 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 23rd of 346 in its sector. The typical advisory or services firm is named in 0.0% of answers.

Overall score

Visibility22
Citations1
Sentiment75
Site quality67
AI readiness7

Summary of account

Named by AI in: 16.7%; 10 of 60 answers
Share of mentions: 35.7%; 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: 92 of 346; by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on Gartner 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

Gartner came up on 4 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

01Where can executives find objective data and tools for critical business decision-making?1/4
02What are alternatives to subscribing to a full-service business advisory membership?0/4
03How can executive teams use research and advisory guidance to prioritize digital transformation initiatives?0/4
04How can businesses evaluate the reliability of advisory insights before following them?0/4
05Ways leaders leverage business research services to navigate market disruption0/4
06How do business research consultancies differ from management consulting firms?0/4
07Business analysis advisory services vs industry intelligence providers—what's the difference?0/4
08What are the top business research and advisory services for executive decision-making?3/4
09Best sources for actionable business insights to support organizational leaders3/4
10What should I do if my advisory service reports don’t address my organization’s specific needs?0/4
11Other ways to access actionable business insights for strategic planning0/4
12Are professional advisory services for executives worth the investment?0/4
13Are there flexible pricing options for companies seeking executive advisory services?0/4
14Is it beneficial for organizations to subscribe to business research services?0/4
15How much do business research and advisory memberships typically cost in the US?3/4

Total named4/152/152/152/1510/60

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 Perplexity actually said

An answer that names the company

Perplexitynamed the company

“What are the top business research and advisory services for executive decision-making?”

For executive decision-making, the strongest business research and advisory services are typically Gartner, Forrester, BCG, Kantar, NielsenIQ, and Dun & Bradstreet, because they cover strategy, market intelligence, customer insight, and due diligence needs.
The best-known options by use case are:
Gartner — independent research and advisory for executives and technology leaders, especially useful for enterprise technology, vendor selection, and strategic planning.
Forrester — research-based insights and strategic advisory for busi …

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
Forrester
11
02
CB Insights
2

Share of mentions

CompanyShare

Forrester
39.3%
Gartner
35.7%
IDC (International Data Corporation)
17.9%
CB Insights
7.1%
The Hackett Group
0.0%
Everest Group
0.0%

Referrers04

Websites the AI used as sources

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

01
justdial.com
35
02
advisory.com
10
03
forbes.com
9
04
linkedin.com
8
05
worldmetrics.org
8
06
deloitte.com
8
07
gitnux.org
8
08
futurumgroup.com
7
09
marketbeat.com
7
10
wifitalents.com
6

Gartner is in the study as a research or media company.

By assistant05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

OpenAI

4/15

Gemini

2/15

Perplexity

2/15

Claude

2/15

Market comparison06

How Gartner 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 92 of 346. Typical company: 27

Named in answers

16.7%

Ranks 23 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%

AI readiness

Ranks 323 of 346. Typical company: 29

Against its category08

Compared with research and media companies

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

Overall score

Ranks 29 of 73. Typical company: 31

Named in answers

16.7%

Ranks 12 of 73. Typical company: 3.3%

AI readiness

Ranks 70 of 73. Typical company: 29

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. Gartner 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
WebMCPNot present

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

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%
WebMCPNot met
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 31 of 100 · 100% of checks could run · checked on October 3, 2026 · www.gartner.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 Gartner 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/gartner.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/gartner.com.svg" alt="Overall score 34 of 100, Finance AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>

End of statement

All 2,219 companies How we measured this

Gartner

What this means for Gartner

Get the full report on Gartner as a PDF

Every question, and where the company came up

What Perplexity actually said

Where the mentions went

Also named

Share of mentions

Websites the AI used as sources

Which AI assistants named the company

How Gartner compares with all 2,219 companies

What makes up the score

Compared with advisory and services firms

Compared with research and media companies

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 Gartner as a PDF

Share this result

Want AI assistants to name your company?