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

MIC Global

micglobal.com

InsurtechInsurance

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
499 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
5th of 18 insurtech companies
Closing balance

Named in

3of 60 answers

by 3 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for MIC Global

AI assistants name this insurtech company in 5% of answers, more often than the typical company in its sector at 1.7%. Its overall score is 37 out of 100, ranking 499th of 2,219 companies and 18th among 97 in its sector. The website passes 5 of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned MIC Global by name. AI assistants named it in 3 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 22nd of 97 in its sector. The typical insurer is named in 1.7% of answers.

Overall score
37Overall score
  • Visibility14
  • Citations3
  • Sentiment75
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness36
Summary of account
Named by AI in
5.0%
3 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
50.0%
of the mentions of it and its 5 peers
AI readiness
5/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 3
Rank in its sector
18 of 97
by overall score, where the typical insurer scores 28

Get the full report on MIC Global 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

MIC Global came up on 2 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01Alternatives to embedded income protection for digital platforms seeking to protect user income?0/4
  2. 02Best practices for implementing income protection for ride-sharing or delivery workers?0/4
  3. 03Non-insurance strategies digital platforms can use to provide financial support to users?0/4
  4. 04How do AI-powered embedded income protection platforms compare to traditional income insurance products?0/4
  5. 05Is embedded income protection really worth it for online marketplaces?0/4
  6. 06Difference between automated underwriting and manual underwriting in income protection solutions?0/4
  7. 07Does offering income protection add value for fintech platforms and their users?0/4
  8. 08Top options for integrated income protection for gig economy workers in the US?2/4
  9. 09How can embedded income protection help increase user trust on gig platforms?0/4
  10. 10How much does it cost for a fintech startup to add automated income protection to their platform?0/4
  11. 11How to address integration challenges with embedded income protection APIs on digital platforms?0/4
  12. 12What should you do if income protection claims are being flagged as fraudulent by automation tools?0/4
  13. 13Typical pricing models for AI-driven embedded income protection solutions?0/4
  14. 14Who should consider integrated income protection—platform owners or end users?0/4
  15. 15What are the best AI-powered embedded income protection solutions for digital platforms?1/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 1/15Perplexity: 1/15Gemini: 1/15All assistants: 3/60
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 AI-powered embedded income protection solutions for digital platforms?”

The strongest fit is MIC Global’s Liners/MiIncome platform, which is specifically designed to let digital platforms embed income-loss protection at the point of sale. Reeske is a potentially useful alternative when personalized coverage recommendations are the priority, but its embedded-platform capabilities should be validated directly.

Solution · Best for · AI and embedded capabilities · Assessment

MIC Global — Liners / MiIncome · Marketplaces, fintechs, gig-economy and subscription platforms · AI-powered income-protection products embedded into digital c …

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
    Cover Genius
    1

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. MIC Global
    50.0%
  2. Cover Genius
    33.3%
  3. SafetyNet
    16.7%
  4. Stride Health
    0.0%
  5. Sure Inc.
    0.0%
  6. Insurety Capital (Insurety Income Protection)
    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
    gowalnut.com
    15
  2. 02
    micglobal.com (its own website)
    8
  3. 03
    f6s.com
    7
  4. 04
    covergenius.com
    5
  5. 05
    whop.com
    4
  6. 06
    marketintelo.com
    4
  7. 07
    differ.blog
    3
  8. 08
    liners.com
    3
  9. 09
    zuora.com
    3
  10. 10
    capco.com
    3

MIC Global is in the study as an insurtech company.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Claude
1/15
Gemini
1/15
Perplexity
1/15
OpenAI
0/15
Market comparisonSection 06

How MIC Global 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
14

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

Citations
3

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

Sentiment
75

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
80

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
36

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 insurers

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

Overall score
37
Ranks 18 of 97. Typical company: 28
Named in answers
5.0%
Ranks 22 of 97. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 7 of 97. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with insurtech companies

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

Overall score
37
Ranks 5 of 18. Typical company: 29
Named in answers
5.0%
Ranks 5 of 18. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 3 of 18. Typical company: 33
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. MIC Global 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.txtPublished
  • 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
25 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

    Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.

    study: 6.2%
  • llms.txtPartly 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 31 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · micglobal.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

5 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%
  • PassedHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 42.5%

Content Accessibility

  • Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 7.4%
  • Passedllms.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 MIC Global 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 MIC Global

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/micglobal.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/micglobal.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