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

Wilh. Werhahn KG

werhahn.de

Banking and fintech infrastructureFinancial technology and data

Money20/20 attendee

Statement period
October 9 to 14, 2026
when the AI assistants were asked
Account no.
1,086 of 2,219
its rank by overall score
Place in its category
159th of 315 fintech infrastructure companies
Closing balance

Named in

1of 60 answers

by 1 of 4 assistants

Statement note

What this means for Wilh. Werhahn KG

AI assistants rarely name Wilh. Werhahn KG, with its name appearing in 1 out of 60 answers, similar to the typical company in its sector. Its overall score is 28 out of 100, which ranks 1,086th of 2,219 companies. Its website passes 3 out of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about its market, so no question mentioned Wilh. Werhahn KG by name. AI assistants named it in 1 of the 60 answers. Counting only how often it is named, it ranks 267th of 574 in its sector. The typical financial technology and data 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
28Overall score
  • Visibility5
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality87
  • AI readiness21
Summary of account
Named by AI in
1.7%
1 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
20.0%
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
302 of 574
by overall score, where the typical financial technology and data company scores 29

Get the full report on Wilh. Werhahn KG 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

Wilh. Werhahn KG came up on 1 of 15 questions. Open any window to read that answer.

  1. 01What are typical applications for natural stone and slate in transportation infrastructure projects?0/4
  2. 02What are the leading holding companies in the building materials and financial services sectors?1/4
  3. 03Alternatives to conglomerates for sourcing financial services and building materials in the United States0/4
  4. 04How are management fees and service costs typically structured in diversified industrial holding companies?0/4
  5. 05Is partnering with a multi-sector holding company a good strategy for business clients?0/4
  6. 06Are diversified holding companies worth considering for institutional investors seeking stability?0/4
  7. 07Best sources for sustainable construction materials and consumer goods in the US0/4
  8. 08Building materials holding company vs. consumer goods conglomerate – what's the difference in service offerings?0/4
  9. 09What are common challenges when dealing with large holding companies in building materials and finance?0/4
  10. 10What are alternative business models to family-owned industrial and services holding firms?0/4
  11. 11How can institutional partners benefit from working with multi-sector holding companies in the US?0/4
  12. 12Which holding companies offer both construction materials and consumer goods to business clients in the US?0/4
  13. 13How do diversified industrial holding companies compare to specialized firms for long-term business growth?0/4
  14. 14How to resolve slow response times from conglomerates providing financial and construction services?0/4
  15. 15What affects the pricing of construction aggregates and consumer goods from holding companies in the US?0/4
Total namedOpenAI: 0/15Claude: 0/15Perplexity: 0/15Gemini: 1/15All assistants: 1/60
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 Gemini actually said

An answer that names the company

Gemininamed the company

“What are the leading holding companies in the building materials and financial services sectors?”

… Wilh. Werhahn KG - A family-owned German company with a diversified group that includes financial services (abcfinance, abcbank, Bank11, abcfinlab) linkedin.com.

Aditya Birla Group - An Indian conglomerate with a significant presence in financial services linkedin.com.

Kibar Holding - A Turkish industrial group with operations including finance and wealth management linkedin.com.

Building Materials Sector:

Several leadi …

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
    CRH plc
    3

Share of mentions

CompanyShare
  1. CRH plc
    80.0%
  2. Wilh. Werhahn KG
    20.0%
  3. Masco Corporation
    0.0%
  4. Saint-Gobain North America
    0.0%
  5. Oldcastle (CRH Americas Materials)
    0.0%
  6. Cemex USA
    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
    axial.net
    7
  2. 02
    umbrex.com
    5
  3. 03
    finance.yahoo.com
    5
  4. 04
    en.wikipedia.org
    5
  5. 05
    diligent.com
    4
  6. 06
    sec.gov
    4
  7. 07
    ad-hoc-news.de
    3
  8. 08
    ctacquisitions.com
    2
  9. 09
    brookings.edu
    2
  10. 10
    partnersgroup.com
    2

Wilh. Werhahn KG is in the study as a fintech infrastructure company.

By assistantSection 05

Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

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

How Wilh. Werhahn KG 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
5

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
87

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 financial technology and data companies

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

Overall score
28
Ranks 302 of 574. Typical company: 29
Named in answers
1.7%
Ranks 267 of 574. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 401 of 574. Typical company: 29
Against its categorySection 08

Compared with fintech infrastructure companies

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

Overall score
28
Ranks 149 of 315. Typical company: 28
Named in answers
1.7%
Ranks 123 of 315. Typical company: 1.7%
AI readiness
21
Ranks 215 of 315. 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?

We could not tell. The website turned away our requests for the files an agent would read. An agent arriving by itself is turned away the same way.

Agent payment protocols
  • x402Not present
  • MPPNot present
  • AP2Not present
  • ACPCould not check
  • UCPCould not check
Interfaces for AI agents
  • MCP Server CardCould not check
  • A2A Agent CardCould not check
  • Agent SkillsCould not check
  • API CatalogCould not check
  • llms.txtNot present
  • 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
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 AuthCould not check

    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 CatalogCould not check

    List public APIs in a linkset at /.well-known/api-catalog.

    study: 1.3%
  • OAuth discoveryCould not check

    Publish OpenID Connect or OAuth server metadata under /.well-known.

    study: 6.3%
  • OAuth Protected ResourceCould not check

    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 CardCould not check

    Offer an MCP server and publish its server card under /.well-known.

    study: 0.8%
  • A2A Agent CardCould not check

    Publish an agent card at /.well-known/agent-card.json.

    study: 0.2%
  • Agent SkillsCould not check

    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 manifestCould not check

    Publish an ai-catalog.json listing every agent interface.

    study: 0.2%

Score 37 of 100 · 65% of checks could run · checked on October 9, 2026 · www.werhahn.de · 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%
  • PassedXML sitemapstudy: 79.4%
  • Not metHTTP 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 Wilh. Werhahn KG 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