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

The Strawhecker Group

tsgpayments.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.
687 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
39th of 177 consultancies
Closing balance

Named in

6of 60 answers

by 3 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for The Strawhecker Group

AI assistants name The Strawhecker Group in 10% of answers, more often than the typical company in its sector, which is named in 0%. Its overall score is 34 out of 100, ranking 687th of 2,219 companies. The website passes 5 out of 14 technical checks for readiness for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned The Strawhecker Group by name. AI assistants named it in 6 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 43rd of 346 in its sector. The typical advisory or services firm is named in 0.0% of answers.

Overall score
34Overall score
  • Visibility19
  • Citations2
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness36
Summary of account
Named by AI in
10.0%
6 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
46.2%
of the mentions of it and its 5 peers
AI readiness
5/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
92 of 346
by overall score, where the typical advisory or services firm scores 27

Get the full report on The Strawhecker Group 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

The Strawhecker Group came up on 4 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01What is the typical cost structure for payments industry consulting in the US?0/4
  2. 02Top rated market intelligence services for payments companies in the US2/4
  3. 03Is it worth investing in payments market intelligence for a midsize financial institution?0/4
  4. 04Ways payment firms can leverage analytics to improve profitability0/4
  5. 05Market intelligence services vs. data analytics services for payment companies—pros and cons?0/4
  6. 06Alternatives to traditional consulting for payment industry market research and analytics1/4
  7. 07How does analytics-focused payments consulting differ from traditional management consulting?0/4
  8. 08How can financial institutions use data-driven consulting to maximize profitability in the payments sector?0/4
  9. 09What value do payments consulting services offer to growing fintech firms?0/4
  10. 10How can payments data and intelligence drive business growth in financial services?0/4
  11. 11What should I do if my financial institution struggles to make informed decisions in the payments space?0/4
  12. 12Are there affordable analytics and market intelligence services for small payments companies?1/4
  13. 13What are the best consulting firms for payments industry analytics and strategic support?2/4
  14. 14Payments industry consulting vs. general financial consulting—what's the difference?0/4
  15. 15How can a payments company address data gaps that hinder growth?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 1/15Perplexity: 3/15Gemini: 2/15All assistants: 6/60
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

“Top rated market intelligence services for payments companies in the US”

For US payments companies, the strongest shortlist is TSG (The Strawhecker Group), Datos Insights, Aite-Novarica, Glenbrook Partners, Datos/Cornerstone Advisors, PaymentsSource, and McKinsey/Boston Consulting Group. The best choice depends on whether the need is proprietary payments data, competitive intelligence, market sizing, investor research, or strategic consulting.

Provider · Best for · Why consider it

TSG · Payments-specific market intelligence and benchmarking · Combines primary and secondary research, surveys, payments analytics, and its PaymentsPulse off …

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
    Aite-Novarica Group
    2
  2. 02
    Mercator Advisory Group
    2

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. The Strawhecker Group
    46.2%
  2. Celent (A Division of Oliver Wyman)
    30.8%
  3. Mercator Advisory Group
    15.4%
  4. Aite-Novarica Group
    7.7%
  5. Payment Advisory Group
    0.0%
  6. RedCompass Labs
    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
    mckinsey.com
    11
  2. 02
    worldmetrics.org
    10
  3. 03
    bain.com
    7
  4. 04
    zipdo.co
    7
  5. 05
    tsgpayments.com (its own website)
    6
  6. 06
    mastercard.com
    6
  7. 07
    volantetech.com
    6
  8. 08
    deloitte.com
    5
  9. 09
    corporate.visa.com
    5
  10. 10
    accenture.com
    5

The Strawhecker Group is in the study as a consultancy.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Perplexity
3/15
Gemini
2/15
Claude
1/15
OpenAI
0/15
Market comparisonSection 06

How The Strawhecker Group 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
19

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
50

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 advisory and services firms

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

Overall score
34
Ranks 92 of 346. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
10.0%
Ranks 43 of 346. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 38 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
34
Ranks 38 of 177. Typical company: 27
Named in answers
10.0%
Ranks 15 of 177. Typical company: 0.0%
AI readiness
36
Ranks 15 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
Can an AI agent check out here?

Not by itself. The Strawhecker Group 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 · tsgpayments.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%
  • Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 42.5%

Content Accessibility

  • PassedMarkdown 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

  • 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 The Strawhecker Group 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 34 of 100 badge for The Strawhecker Group

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/tsgpayments.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/finance/badges/tsgpayments.com.svg" alt="Overall score 34 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