Back to the study

Gen Digital

gendigital.com · Technology · GEN, NLOK, SYMC

Ranked 1,719 of 2,047 companies in the study

26Overall score
  • Visibility0
  • Citations0
  • Sentiment50
  • Site quality80
  • AI readiness21
What this means for Gen Digital

AI assistants do not name Gen Digital in any of their 60 answers, while they often mention companies like Bitdefender, McAfee, and Trend Micro. Its overall score is 26 out of 100, ranking 1,719th of 2,047 companies, which is below the typical company in the technology sector. The company's website passes 3 of 14 technical checks for readiness for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about the technology market: none named Gen Digital. AI assistants named it in none of 60 answers. The typical technology company is named in 10.0% of answers. By how often it is named, Gen Digital ranks 236 of 273 in its sector.

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 rivals.

Named by AI in
0.0%
0 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
0.0%
compared with 5 rivals
AI readiness
3/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 4
Rank in its sector
237 of 273
by overall score, where the typical technology company scores 36
How Gen Digital compares with all 2,047 companies

Every dot is a company in the study. Hover one to see it; click to open its report.

This companySame sectorEvery other companyNever named

What makes up the score

Five parts, each scored out of 100.

Visibility
0

How often AI assistants name the company

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
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.

Compared with technology

273 companies in this sector. The line on each bar is the typical company.

Overall score26
Ranks 237 of 273. Typical company: 36
Named in answers0%
Ranks 236 of 273. Typical company: 10%
AI readiness21
Ranks 161 of 273. Typical company: 29
What Gemini actually said

The company is not named in this answer

“Identity theft protection vs. credit monitoring services—what’s the difference?”

While both identity theft protection and credit monitoring services aim to safeguard your financial well-being, they differ in their scope and the types of threats they address. Credit monitoring focuses specifically on your credit reports, whereas identity theft protection offers a broader shield against various cyber threats and provides assistance if your identity is stolen.

Here's a breakdown of the differences:

Credit Monitoring Services

Focus: Credit monitoring primarily tracks activity on your credit reports from the three major credit bureaus: Equifax, Experian, and Tran …

The AI’s answer as we received it, shortened and not checked for accuracy.

Named instead
Bitdefender9McAfee3Trend Micro3Experian IdentityWorks2Kaspersky1
Share of mentions

How the mentions in these answers were split between this company and its rivals

Experian IdentityWorks
40.5%
Bitdefender
33.3%
McAfee
14.3%
Kaspersky
7.1%
Trend Micro
4.8%
Gen Digital
0.0%
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
Ready for AI agents

What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and buy from, 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
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: 92.0%
  • SitemapPassed

    An XML sitemap listing the pages, ideally referenced from robots.txt.

    study: 86.8%
  • Link headersNot met

    Send Link headers such as rel="api-catalog" or rel="describedby" on the homepage.

    study: 0.3%
  • DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present

    Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.

    study: 5.5%
Content accessibility
0 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

    Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.

    study: 1.9%
  • llms.txtNot met

    Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.

    study: 25.1%
Bot access control
32 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPartly met

    Add explicit robots.txt groups for the main AI crawlers.

    study: 93.4%
  • Content SignalsNot met

    Add a Content-Signal line for search, ai-input and ai-train to robots.txt.

    study: 1.4%
  • Web Bot AuthNot present

    Only relevant if you run your own agents or crawlers: publish a signing key directory.

    study: 0.2%
APIs, auth and MCP
0 of 100
  • API CatalogNot met

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

    study: 0.3%
  • OAuth discoveryNot met

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

    study: 11.8%
  • OAuth Protected ResourceNot met

    Serve protected resource metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource.

    study: 10.3%
  • auth.mdNot met

    Publish an auth.md describing how agents sign in.

    study: 0.0%
  • MCP Server CardNot met

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

    study: 0.2%
  • A2A Agent CardNot met

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

    study: 0.1%
  • Agent SkillsNot met

    Publish a skills index with the main tasks agents can do.

    study: 0.2%
  • WebMCPCould not check

    Register key actions such as search or cart as WebMCP tools.

    study: 33.7%
  • ARD manifestNot met

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

    study: 0.1%

Score 25 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.gendigital.com · 2,047 companies scanned

See how every company did, and how this was measured.

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: 85.0%
  • PassedXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
  • Not metHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 29.0%
Content Accessibility
  • Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 8.3%
  • Not metllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
  • PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
Bot Access Control
  • Not metExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 13.0%
API / Auth / MCP
  • 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%
What AI crawlers may read (robots.txt)

This website sets no rules for any AI crawler by name, like 84% 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.

Websites the AI used as sources

How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers

security.org
44
pcmag.com
19
techradar.com
13
cybernews.com
11
safehome.org
10
cnet.com
10
cybersecuritynews.com
10
nerdwallet.com
9
consumerreports.org
9
gizmodo.com
9

In the study as S&P 500.

Every question, and where the company came up (0 of 15)
QuestionOpenAIClaudePerplexityGemini
  • Identity theft protection vs. credit monitoring services—what’s the difference?
  • How can I fix issues with a personal device that keeps flagging phishing attempts?
  • Top-rated cybersecurity solutions for protecting personal devices at home
  • How can identity protection services help after a data breach notification?
  • Are digital financial wellness platforms worth subscribing to for budgeting and monitoring?
  • What should I do if my financial wellness dashboard shows incorrect credit alerts?
  • Are there free financial management apps that also include digital privacy features?
  • What is the average monthly cost for consumer-focused digital security suites in the US?
  • Best online tools for managing both digital safety and personal finances
  • How do digital privacy tools compare to traditional antivirus software?
  • Which types of cybersecurity software are best for remote workers managing sensitive information?
  • What are some effective alternatives to traditional identity theft protection services?
  • Alternatives to bundled cybersecurity and financial wellness app subscriptions
  • What are the best identity protection services for families in the US?
  • Is it necessary to combine online privacy tools with device security apps?
named the companyanswered without naming itdid not answer

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.

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