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

Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence

paymentscmi.com

Consultancies and professional servicesAdvisers and services

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
367 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
16th of 177 consultancies
Closing balance

Named in

2of 60 answers

by 2 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence

AI assistants rarely name this consultancy, mentioning it in 2 of 60 answers. In the same answers, they sometimes mention Celent or Aite-Novarica Group. Its overall score is 39 out of 100, which ranks 367th of 2,219 companies in the study and 31st of 346 in its sector. Its website passes 4 of 14 technical checks for readiness for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence by name. AI assistants named it in 2 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 96th of 346 in its sector. The typical advisory or services firm is named in 0.0% 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
39Overall score
  • Visibility10
  • Citations2
  • Sentiment100
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness29
Summary of account
Named by AI in
3.3%
2 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
40.0%
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
31 of 346
by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence 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

Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence came up on 1 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01How much do payments consulting engagements usually cost for fintech startups?0/4
  2. 02How to address gaps in payments data when developing a market entry strategy?0/4
  3. 03How do banks use global payments research to inform strategic decisions?0/4
  4. 04Use cases for consulting services specializing in payments strategy and growth mapping0/4
  5. 05Best ways for financial professionals to stay updated on payments industry shifts0/4
  6. 06What are typical pricing models for payments market intelligence platforms in the US?0/4
  7. 07What resources can banks use if full-service payments market intelligence is out of budget?0/4
  8. 08How does proprietary payments research compare to syndicated industry reports?0/4
  9. 09Do financial services professionals benefit from ongoing payments industry insights subscriptions?0/4
  10. 10How can proprietary research help a bank identify new revenue streams in payments?0/4
  11. 11Is payments market data worth the investment for mid-sized fintech companies?0/4
  12. 12Alternatives to proprietary payments data for benchmarking industry performance0/4
  13. 13Common challenges when interpreting global payments trends and how to solve them0/4
  14. 14Payments market intelligence consulting vs. traditional business consulting—what's the difference?0/4
  15. 15What are the best payments market intelligence services for financial institutions?2/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 1/15Perplexity: 0/15Gemini: 1/15All assistants: 2/60
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 Claude actually said

An answer that names the company

Claudenamed the company

“What are the best payments market intelligence services for financial institutions?”

… Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence (PCMI)

PCMI combines proprietary research, market intelligence, and payments expertise to help clients identify where new revenue will be created by mapping structural advantage, category ownership, and market inflection points across regulation, infrastructure, competition, and culture.

GlobalData

GlobalData covers the entire spectrum of the global banking and payments market, and provides granular market intelligence including market data with 5-year forecasts updated on a monthly basis, covering retail banking and lending, cards, and othe …

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
    Celent
    1
  2. 02
    Aite-Novarica Group
    1
  3. 03
    Mercator Advisory Group
    1
  4. 04
    Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence (PCMI)
    1

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence
    40.0%
  2. Mercator Advisory Group
    20.0%
  3. Celent
    20.0%
  4. Aite-Novarica Group
    20.0%
  5. Payments Cards & Mobile (PCM Consulting)
    0.0%
  6. Cornerstone Advisors
    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
    capgemini.com
    8
  2. 02
    mastercard.com
    8
  3. 03
    linkedin.com
    7
  4. 04
    tsgpayments.com
    6
  5. 05
    mckinsey.com
    5
  6. 06
    paymentscmi.com (its own website)
    5
  7. 07
    bain.com
    5
  8. 08
    accenture.com
    4
  9. 09
    paymentsindustryintelligence.com
    4
  10. 10
    documents1.worldbank.org
    4

Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence is in the study as a consultancy.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

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

How Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence 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
10

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

Citations
2

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

Sentiment
100

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
80

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
29

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
39
Ranks 31 of 346. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
3.3%
Ranks 96 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
29
Ranks 96 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
39
Ranks 12 of 177. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
3.3%
Ranks 37 of 177. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
29
Ranks 48 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 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. Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence 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
93 of 100
  • robots.txtPassed

    A valid robots.txt with crawl rules at the site root.

    study: 86.1%
  • SitemapPartly met

    Serve an XML sitemap and reference it from robots.txt.

    study: 87.9%
  • Link headersCould not check

    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
50 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

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

    study: 6.2%
  • llms.txtPassed

    An llms.txt that tells language models what the site offers.

    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 37 of 100 · 92% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · paymentscmi.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

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%
  • Not metHTTP 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 Payments and Commerce Market Intelligence 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 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