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
RP

Rosenberg & Parker

suretybond.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.
2,132 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
173rd of 177 consultancies
Closing balance

Named in

0of 60, its tower is dark

by 0 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Rosenberg & Parker

AI assistants do not name this consultancy in any of their 60 answers. Its overall score is 22 out of 100, ranking 2,132nd of 2,219 in the study. The website passes 3 of 14 technical checks for how ready it is for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Rosenberg & Parker by name. AI assistants named it in none of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 149th 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
22Overall score
  • Visibility0
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality60
  • AI readiness21
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
3/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
332 of 346
by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on Rosenberg & Parker 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

Rosenberg & Parker came up on 0 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01Is working with a specialist surety broker worth the extra cost for my company?0/4
  2. 02How do I find a surety brokerage that tailors solutions for complex business needs?0/4
  3. 03When should a business consider a tailored surety solution versus a standard one?0/4
  4. 04Why are my surety bond premiums higher than industry averages?0/4
  5. 05Are there technological solutions or platforms that can replace traditional surety broker services?0/4
  6. 06What are the best surety bond brokers for large construction projects in the US?0/4
  7. 07Do large businesses benefit from using an independent surety brokerage?0/4
  8. 08What factors most affect the price of a commercial surety bond?0/4
  9. 09Which types of organizations most often require surety bonds?0/4
  10. 10What can I do if my surety bond application was denied?0/4
  11. 11How are fees and commissions for surety bond brokerage services typically structured in the US?0/4
  12. 12What are the main alternatives to using a surety bond brokerage for obtaining bonds?0/4
  13. 13What’s the difference between local and national surety bond brokers for organizations?0/4
  14. 14How does a surety bond broker differ from an insurance broker for business risk management?0/4
  15. 15Can businesses obtain surety bonds directly from issuers without using a broker?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

“When should a business consider a tailored surety solution versus a standard one?”

I'll search for information about when businesses should choose tailored versus standard surety solutions.Based on the search results, here are key considerations for when a business should choose tailored versus standard surety solutions:

When to Consider Tailored Surety Solutions

Larger corporations with complex needs are more likely to favor a tailored approach and personalized contact. Tailored solutions are particularly beneficial when:

Complex Business Requirements: No two businesses are the same, and tailored surety bonds solutions are designed to fit the business strategies …

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.

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. Surety Solutions, A Gallagher Company
    50.0%
  2. USI Surety
    50.0%
  3. Rosenberg & Parker
    0.0%
  4. Nielson, Hoover & Company
    0.0%
  5. Allstar Surety
    0.0%
  6. PayneWest Insurance Surety Division (now Marsh McLennan Agency)
    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
    allianz-trade.com
    8
  2. 02
    nfp.com
    6
  3. 03
    gritinsurance.com
    6
  4. 04
    insurancebusinessreview.com
    6
  5. 05
    suretybondsdirect.com
    5
  6. 06
    jetsurety.com
    5
  7. 07
    legalclarity.org
    4
  8. 08
    suretybonds.com
    4
  9. 09
    constructioncoverage.com
    4
  10. 10
    suretynow.com
    4

Rosenberg & Parker is in the study as a consultancy.

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 Rosenberg & Parker 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
60

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
21

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
22
Ranks 332 of 346. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 149 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 228 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
22
Ranks 168 of 177. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
0.0%
Ranks 62 of 177. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 113 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. Rosenberg & Parker 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
41 of 100
  • robots.txtPassed

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

    study: 86.1%
  • SitemapNot 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
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 16 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · suretybond.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

3 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%
  • 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%
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

  • GPTBotallowed
  • ClaudeBotallowed
  • Anthropic-AIallowed
  • Google-Extendedallowed
  • Applebot-Extendedallowed
  • Meta-ExternalAgentallowed
  • FacebookBotallowed
  • Bytespiderallowed
  • CCBotallowed
  • Diffbotallowed
  • Omgilibotallowed

AI search

  • OAI-SearchBotallowed
  • Claude-SearchBotallowed
  • PerplexityBotallowed
  • Applebotallowed
  • Amazonbotallowed
  • YouBotallowed

Answering questions

  • ChatGPT-Userallowed
  • Claude-Userallowed
  • Perplexity-Userallowed
  • DuckAssistBotallowed
  • MistralAI-Userallowed

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 Rosenberg & Parker 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