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.
1,836 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
150th of 203 payment processors
Closing balance

Named in

0of 60, its tower is dark

by 0 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Prommt

AI assistants do not name this payment processor in any of their 60 answers. Its overall score is 25 out of 100, ranking 1,836th of 2,219 companies in the study and 280th of 375 in its sector. The website passes 2 of 14 technical checks for how ready it is for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Prommt by name. AI assistants named it in none of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 179th of 375 in its sector. The typical cards and payments company 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
25Overall score
  • Visibility0
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness14
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
2/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
280 of 375
by overall score, where the typical cards and payments company scores 27

Get the full report on Prommt 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

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

  1. 01How can hospitality businesses streamline their payment process using payment request management tools?0/4
  2. 02What are low-tech ways businesses can accept remote payments without investing in a platform?0/4
  3. 03Best way to securely collect payments from remote clients without phone or in-person transactions0/4
  4. 04Is investing in a payment request platform worth it for a mid-sized business looking to reduce late payments?0/4
  5. 05How does an all-in-one payment request and management system compare to using separate invoicing and payment gateway solutions?0/4
  6. 06Do payment request tools actually boost payment conversion rates for service-based businesses?0/4
  7. 07What should you do if a customer doesn’t receive a payment link sent by SMS or email?0/4
  8. 08Common reasons why payment requests might fail or go unprocessed in online payment systems0/4
  9. 09Payment request links vs integrating payment portals into your website: which is better for small businesses?0/4
  10. 10What is the typical cost structure for payment request and management platforms in the US?0/4
  11. 11What are the best platforms for sending secure payment requests to customers via SMS or email?0/4
  12. 12What are some alternatives to managing payment requests manually with invoices or spreadsheets?0/4
  13. 13Which tools offer seamless online payment collection and tracking for businesses?0/4
  14. 14Best alternatives for accepting online payments if you don't want to use a dedicated payment request tool0/4
  15. 15Are there any payment request systems with no monthly fees, just per-transaction pricing?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 0/15Perplexity: 0/15Gemini: 0/15All assistants: 0/60
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

The company is not named in this answer

Claudedid not name the company

“Best way to securely collect payments from remote clients without phone or in-person transactions”

I can provide some general guidance on secure remote payment collection methods. Here are the best practices:

Secure Payment Processing Methods

1. Payment Processors & Gateways

Use established platforms like Stripe, PayPal, Square, or Authorize.net

These handle PCI DSS compliance (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard)

They encrypt card data and never store sensitive information on your servers

2. Invoice-Based Payments

Send professional invoices with integrated payment links

Platforms like FreshBooks, Wave, or QuickBooks Online allow clients to pay directly

Pr …

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.

Named instead

CompanyTimes named
  1. 01
    PayRequest
    1
  2. 02
    Square Payment Links
    1

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. Square Payment Links
    86.4%
  2. PayRequest
    13.6%
  3. Prommt
    0.0%
  4. Request Finance
    0.0%
  5. Linkly
    0.0%
  6. Payrix
    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
    stripe.com
    19
  2. 02
    payrequest.io
    8
  3. 03
    wise.com
    5
  4. 04
    cashfree.com
    5
  5. 05
    finix.com
    4
  6. 06
    cloudbeds.com
    4
  7. 07
    quickbooks.intuit.com
    4
  8. 08
    technologyadvice.com
    3
  9. 09
    uschamber.com
    3
  10. 10
    business.com
    3

Prommt is in the study as a payment processor.

By assistantSection 05

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 comparisonSection 06

How Prommt 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
0

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

Citations
0

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

Sentiment
50

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
80

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 cards and payments companies

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

Overall score
25
Ranks 280 of 375. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 179 of 375. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 300 of 375. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with payment processors

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

Overall score
25
Ranks 142 of 203. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 91 of 203. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
14
Ranks 148 of 203. 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
Can an AI agent check out here?

Not by itself. Prommt 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
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 36 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.prommt.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%
  • Not metXML 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 Prommt 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

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