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 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
198 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
7th of 177 consultancies
Closing balance

Named in

5of 60 answers

by 4 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Grant Thornton

AI assistants name Grant Thornton in 8.3% of answers, which is higher than the typical company in its sector. Its overall score is 41 out of 100, ranking 198th of 2,219 overall and 18th of 346 in its sector. Its website passes 2 of 14 technical checks for readiness for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Grant Thornton by name. AI assistants named it in 5 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 53rd of 346 in its sector. The typical advisory or services firm is named in 0.0% of answers.

Overall score
41Overall score
  • Visibility13
  • Citations1
  • Sentiment100
  • Site quality93
  • AI readiness14
Summary of account
Named by AI in
8.3%
5 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
23.8%
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
18 of 346
by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on Grant Thornton 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

Grant Thornton came up on 2 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01Typical price range for tax advisory support for corporations0/4
  2. 02How does an external audit differ from an internal audit for corporations?0/4
  3. 03Top business advisory solutions for expanding mid-size companies1/4
  4. 04What are some other ways companies can ensure regulatory compliance besides standard assurance services?0/4
  5. 05What are the best audit and assurance services for large organizations in the US?4/4
  6. 06Common challenges companies face during annual assurance reviews0/4
  7. 07What affects the cost of audit and assurance services for large US businesses?0/4
  8. 08When should a business seek specialized advisory support for mergers and acquisitions?0/4
  9. 09Alternatives to traditional yearly audits for large organizations0/4
  10. 10Is it better to hire one firm for both audit and advisory needs or use separate specialists?0/4
  11. 11Tax consulting vs. business advisory services—what’s the main difference for midsize businesses?0/4
  12. 12Who needs tailored compliance risk assessment services?0/4
  13. 13Are comprehensive tax advisory packages worth it for growing enterprises?0/4
  14. 14Best solutions for integrating AI into financial advisory for efficiency gains?0/4
  15. 15How to handle discrepancies found in a financial statement audit?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 1/15Claude: 1/15Perplexity: 2/15Gemini: 1/15All assistants: 5/60
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 Perplexity actually said

An answer that names the company

Perplexitynamed the company

“What are the best audit and assurance services for large organizations in the US?”

For large US organizations, the strongest audit and assurance options are typically the Big Four—Deloitte, PwC, EY, and KPMG—plus large alternatives such as Grant Thornton, BDO, and RSM. The best choice depends on public-company reporting needs, industry expertise, global coverage, technology risk, and independence requirements.

Best services by need

Need · Best-fit services · Strong providers

Public-company financial statement audits · PCAOB-registered independent audit, SOX 404 internal-control attestation, quarterly review support · Deloitte, PwC, EY, KPMG

G …

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.

Also named

CompanyTimes named
  1. 01
    KPMG
    5
  2. 02
    Deloitte
    5

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. KPMG
    38.1%
  2. Deloitte
    33.3%
  3. Grant Thornton
    23.8%
  4. RSM US LLP
    4.8%
  5. BDO USA
    0.0%
  6. Eide Bailly LLP
    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
    worldmetrics.org
    7
  2. 02
    instead.com
    6
  3. 03
    tax.thomsonreuters.com
    5
  4. 04
    sdocpa.com
    4
  5. 05
    zipdo.co
    3
  6. 06
    slrconsulting.com
    3
  7. 07
    pwc.com
    3
  8. 08
    icaew.com
    3
  9. 09
    linkedin.com
    3
  10. 10
    corporatetaxadvisors.com
    3

Grant Thornton is in the study as a consultancy.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

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

How Grant Thornton 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
13

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
100

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
93

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 advisory and services firms

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

Overall score
41
Ranks 18 of 346. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
8.3%
Ranks 53 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 301 of 346. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with consultancies

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

Overall score
41
Ranks 7 of 177. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
8.3%
Ranks 19 of 177. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 154 of 177. 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?

Not by itself. Grant Thornton 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
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 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 7 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · grantthornton.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%
  • 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%
Take it with you

Get the full report on Grant Thornton 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 11

Share this result

Overall score 41 of 100 badge for Grant Thornton

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/grantthornton.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/grantthornton.com.svg" alt="Overall score 41 of 100, Finance AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>
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