- Visibility15
- Citations6
- Sentiment92
- Site quality93
- AI readiness29
AI assistants name Fortinet in 10% of answers, which is about as often as the typical company in the technology sector. Its overall score is 42 out of 100, ranking 260th of 2,047 companies. Fortinet's website passes 4 of 14 technical checks, measuring how ready it is for AI tools.
We asked 15 unbranded questions about the technology market: none named Fortinet. AI assistants named it in 6 of 60 answers (10.0%). The typical technology company is named in 10.0% of answers. By how often it is named, Fortinet ranks 132 of 273 in its sector.
Every dot is a company in the study. Hover one to see it; click to open its report.
This companySame sectorEvery other companyNever named
Five parts, each scored out of 100.
How often AI assistants name the company
How often AI uses the company's own website as a source
How positively AI describes the company
How well built the website's own pages are
How easily AI tools can read and use the website
Visibility is calculated from the answers on this page. How the score is built.
273 companies in this sector. The line on each bar is the typical company.
An answer that names the company
“Which solutions can replace unified SASE platforms for organizations with limited cloud adoption?”
For organizations with limited cloud adoption, fully unified SASE platforms may not be the most suitable immediate solution due to their cloud-native nature. Instead, several alternative or transitional solutions can address their security and networking needs:
1. Hybrid SASE Solutions
Hybrid SASE is an approach that allows organizations to combine existing on-premise security infrastructure with cloud-based SASE components. This offers a more gradual transition to a full SASE deployment.
Flexible Enforcement Points: Hybrid SASE allows the use of both on-premise firewalls and clo …
The AI’s answer as we received it, shortened and not checked for accuracy.
How the mentions in these answers were split between this company and its rivals
Answers naming it, out of answers received
What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and buy from, on a scale of six levels.
- 0
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Level 1: Basic web presence. Two of robots.txt, a sitemap and Link headers are in place.
- Content Signals
Show every check, for your technical teamHide the checks
- study: 92.0%robots.txtPassed
A valid robots.txt with crawl rules at the site root.
- study: 86.8%SitemapPassed
An XML sitemap listing the pages, ideally referenced from robots.txt.
- study: 0.3%Link headersNot met
Send Link headers such as rel="api-catalog" or rel="describedby" on the homepage.
- study: 5.5%DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present
Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.
- study: 1.9%Markdown negotiationNot met
Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.
- study: 25.1%llms.txtNot met
Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.
- study: 93.4%AI bot rulesPartly met
Add explicit robots.txt groups for the main AI crawlers.
- study: 1.4%Content SignalsNot met
Add a Content-Signal line for search, ai-input and ai-train to robots.txt.
- study: 0.2%Web Bot AuthNot present
Only relevant if you run your own agents or crawlers: publish a signing key directory.
- study: 0.3%API CatalogNot met
List public APIs in a linkset at /.well-known/api-catalog.
- study: 11.8%OAuth discoveryNot met
Publish OpenID Connect or OAuth server metadata under /.well-known.
- study: 10.3%OAuth Protected ResourceNot met
Serve protected resource metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource.
- study: 0.0%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: 0.1%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: 33.7%WebMCPCould not check
Register key actions such as search or cart as WebMCP tools.
- study: 0.1%ARD manifestNot met
Publish an ai-catalog.json listing every agent interface.
Score 25 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.fortinet.com · 2,047 companies scanned
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 checksHide them
- Passedrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.0%
- PassedXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
- Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 29.0%
- Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 8.3%
- Not metllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
- PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
- PassedExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 13.0%
- Not metAPI Catalog (.well-known/api-catalog)study: 0.2%
- Not metOAuth Authorization Server discoverystudy: 10.1%
- Not metOAuth Protected Resource discoverystudy: 9.3%
- Not metMCP Server Cardstudy: 0.0%
- Not metA2A Agent Cardstudy: 0.0%
- Not metWebMCP toolsstudy: 4.2%
- Not metAgent Skills declaredstudy: 0.0%
This website sets rules for 8 AI crawlers by name. All others follow its general rules.
- GPTBot*partly
- ClaudeBotblocked
- Anthropic-AIblocked
- Google-Extended*partly
- Applebot-Extendedblocked
- Meta-ExternalAgentblocked
- FacebookBotblocked
- Bytespiderblocked
- CCBotblocked
- Diffbotblocked
- Omgilibotblocked
- OAI-SearchBot*partly
- Claude-SearchBot*partly
- PerplexityBot*partly
- Applebotblocked
- Amazonbotblocked
- YouBot*blocked
- ChatGPT-User*partly
- Claude-User*partly
- Perplexity-Userblocked
- DuckAssistBotblocked
- MistralAI-Userblocked
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.
How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers
In the study as S&P 500.
- Unified SASE versus traditional firewall: which is better for remote office security?
- What are typical costs for deploying unified cybersecurity solutions in enterprise settings?
- Which advanced endpoint security tools are most effective for large organizations?
- Which solutions can replace unified SASE platforms for organizations with limited cloud adoption?
- Why might a centralized threat management dashboard fail to detect lateral movement in a corporate network?
- How do you resolve persistent false positives with enterprise-grade EDR systems?
- What should enterprises look for when choosing a cloud-centric security solution?
- What are effective strategies to govern AI use across endpoints in a large organization?
- What options exist besides AI-driven endpoint protection for safeguarding sensitive enterprise data?
- What are the best alternatives to hybrid mesh firewalls for securing distributed networks?
- What are the best enterprise cybersecurity solutions for protecting hybrid workforces?
- Are AI-powered cybersecurity platforms worth the investment for midsize businesses?
- How can hybrid mesh firewalls help secure data centers in multi-cloud environments?
- Is there a significant price difference between all-in-one network security suites and standalone point solutions?
- How does network-centric security compare to endpoint-focused protection for enterprises?
Columns, left to right: OpenAI, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini. The AI assistants often disagree. Across the study, on 40% of the questions where a company is named, only one of the four names it.
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/fortinet.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/fortinet.com.svg" alt="Overall score 42 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>