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

Account holder

Miden

miden.xyz

Stablecoins and digital asset infrastructure Crypto and digital assets

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period: October 9 to 14, 2026; when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.: 1,817 of 2,219; its rank by overall score
Place in its category: 72nd of 80 digital asset infrastructure companies

Closing balance

Named in

0of 60, its tower is dark

by 0 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Miden

AI assistants do not name this digital asset infrastructure company in any of their 60 answers to market questions. Its overall score is 25 out of 100, ranking 1,817th of 2,219 companies, while the typical company in its sector scores 30. Its website passes 4 of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Miden by name. AI assistants named it in none of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 67th of 102 in its sector. The typical crypto and digital asset company is named in 1.7% 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

Visibility0
Citations0
Sentiment50
Site quality73
AI readiness29

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: 4/14; technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector: 90 of 102; by overall score, where the typical crypto and digital asset company scores 30

Get the full report on Miden 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

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

01How do privacy-focused blockchains compare to traditional blockchains for regulatory compliance?0/4
02What are the main alternatives to privacy blockchains that support compliance and selective disclosure?0/4
03Which confidential blockchain platforms support selective disclosure for finance?0/4
04How much does it cost to deploy privacy-enabled blockchain solutions for finance?0/4
05Is it worth implementing a privacy blockchain for confidential financial data management?0/4
06Which private blockchain technologies are favored by financial institutions in the US for compliance?0/4
07Is there a pricing difference between standard blockchain platforms and privacy-focused blockchains with regulatory support?0/4
08How can you debug issues with zero-knowledge proof transactions on privacy-first blockchain networks?0/4
09Are there non-blockchain solutions for confidential and compliant digital finance?0/4
10Why might a privacy blockchain transaction fail compliance checks?0/4
11Are privacy blockchains with selective disclosure worth considering for regulated fintech applications?0/4
12What are the best privacy blockchains for compliant financial transactions?0/4
13Zero-knowledge proof blockchains vs. general-purpose blockchains: What are the main differences for financial institutions?0/4
14What are common applications for zero-knowledge proofs in financial blockchain solutions?0/4
15How can banks use privacy blockchains for confidential client transactions while remaining compliant?0/4

Total named0/150/150/150/150/60

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 Gemini actually said

The company is not named in this answer

Geminidid not name the company

“How do privacy-focused blockchains compare to traditional blockchains for regulatory compliance?”

Privacy-focused blockchains aim to address the inherent transparency of traditional blockchains, which can create challenges for regulatory compliance, particularly concerning data privacy and the right to be forgotten. While traditional blockchains offer transparency and immutability, privacy-focused ones seek to balance these features with the need for confidentiality and selective disclosure.
Here's a comparison:
Traditional Blockchains (e.g., public, permissionless blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum):
Transparency: All transactions are publicly visible and permanently rec …

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.

Named instead

CompanyTimes named

01
Aztec
7
02
Zcash
6

Share of mentions

CompanyShare

Zcash
57.9%
Aztec
42.1%
Miden
0.0%
Iron Fish
0.0%
Findora
0.0%
Panther Protocol
0.0%

Referrers04

Websites the AI used as sources

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

01
chain.link
13
02
arxiv.org
11
03
cdn.prod.website-files.com
7
04
chainalysis.com
6
05
concordium.com
5
06
utila.io
5
07
binance.com
4
08
ethereum.org
4
09
github.com
4
10
blockchain-council.org
4

Miden is in the study as a digital asset infrastructure company.

By assistant05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Claude

0/15

Gemini

0/15

OpenAI

0/15

Perplexity

0/15

Market comparison06

How Miden 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 crypto and digital asset companies

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

Overall score

Ranks 90 of 102. Typical company: 30

Named in answers

0.0%

Ranks 67 of 102. Typical company: 1.7%

AI readiness

Ranks 52 of 102. Typical company: 33

Against its category08

Compared with digital asset infrastructure companies

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

Overall score

Ranks 70 of 80. Typical company: 29

Named in answers

0.0%

Ranks 51 of 80. Typical company: 1.7%

AI readiness

Ranks 42 of 80. Typical company: 36

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 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. Miden 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

44 of 100

robots.txtNot met
Publish a valid robots.txt with crawl rules and a Sitemap line.
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 DiscoveryPassed
SVCB or HTTPS records under _agents that advertise agent endpoints.
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 18 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.miden.xyz · 2,200 companies scanned

See how every company did, and how this was measured.

AI readiness10

The checks behind the AI readiness score

4 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%
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 Miden 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

End of statement

All 2,219 companies How we measured this

Miden

What this means for Miden

Get the full report on Miden as a PDF

Every question, and where the company came up

What Gemini actually said

Where the mentions went

Named instead

Share of mentions

Websites the AI used as sources

Which AI assistants named the company

How Miden compares with all 2,219 companies

What makes up the score

Compared with crypto and digital asset companies

Compared with digital asset infrastructure 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 Miden as a PDF

Want AI assistants to name your company?