Back to the study

Greif

greif.com · Industrial · GEF

Ranked 686 of 2,047 companies in the study

37Overall score
  • Visibility13
  • Citations1
  • Sentiment75
  • Site quality87
  • AI readiness36
What this means for Greif

AI assistants rarely name Greif: out of 60 answers, they name the company in 2 answers, which is less often than for many peers. Greif's overall score is 37 out of 100, ranking 686th of 2,047 companies. The company's website passes 5 of 14 technical checks for readiness with AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about the industrial market: none named Greif. AI assistants named it in 2 of 60 answers (3.3%). The typical industrial company is named in 5.0% of answers. By how often it is named, Greif ranks 138 of 246 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
3.3%
2 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
28.6%
compared with 5 rivals
AI readiness
5/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 3
Rank in its sector
64 of 246
by overall score, where the typical industrial company scores 31
How Greif 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
13

How often AI assistants name the company

Citations
1

How often AI uses the company's own website as a source

Sentiment
75

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
87

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.

Compared with industrial

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

Overall score37
Ranks 64 of 246. Typical company: 31
Named in answers3%
Ranks 138 of 246. Typical company: 5%
AI readiness36
Ranks 6 of 246. Typical company: 21
What OpenAI actually said

An answer that names the company

“Are recycled-content drums worth it for large-scale manufacturers?”

Short answer: often — but not always. Recycled-content drums can be worth it for large-scale manufacturers when the product, logistics, regulations, and economics align. Below I summarize the main benefits and risks, the conditions where they typically pay off, practical metrics to evaluate ROI, and an implementation checklist you can use to decide for your operation.

Key benefits

Lower embodied carbon and potential GHG reductions vs virgin-material drums (especially for plastics where recycled HDPE content can reduce lifecycle emissions). Use EPA tools to quantify your actual savings. ([ep …

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

Share of mentions

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

Greif
100.0%
Mauser Packaging Solutions
0.0%
Berry Global
0.0%
Sonoco
0.0%
Schütz Container Systems
0.0%
International Paper (Industrial Packaging)
0.0%
Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Gemini
1/15
OpenAI
1/15
Perplexity
0/15
Claude
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
Can an AI agent buy here?

Not by itself. Greif publishes none of the purchase protocols we look for. An agent would have to click through the checkout like a person.

  • UCPNot present
  • ACPNot present
  • AP2Not present
  • x402Not present
  • MPPNot present

The shop runs on WooCommerce.

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
63 of 100
  • AI bot rulesPassed

    Explicit robots.txt rules for AI crawlers such as GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot.

    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
18 of 100
  • API CatalogNot met

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

    study: 0.3%
  • OAuth discoveryPartly met

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

    study: 11.8%
  • OAuth Protected ResourcePassed

    Metadata telling agents which authorization server to use.

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

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

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: 85.0%
  • PassedXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
  • PassedHTTP 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
  • PassedExplicit 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 rules for 3 AI crawlers by name. All others follow its general rules.

Training AI
  • GPTBot*allowed
  • ClaudeBotpartly
  • Anthropic-AIpartly
  • Google-Extendedpartly
  • Applebot-Extendedpartly
  • Meta-ExternalAgentpartly
  • FacebookBotpartly
  • Bytespiderpartly
  • CCBotpartly
  • Diffbotpartly
  • Omgilibotpartly
AI search
  • OAI-SearchBot*allowed
  • Claude-SearchBotpartly
  • PerplexityBotpartly
  • Applebotpartly
  • Amazonbotpartly
  • YouBotpartly
Answering questions
  • ChatGPT-User*allowed
  • Claude-Userpartly
  • Perplexity-Userpartly
  • DuckAssistBotpartly
  • MistralAI-Userpartly

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

industrialpackaging.com
9
dataintelo.com
7
alibaba.com
7
iqsdirectory.com
7
itppackaging.com
6
sustainablepackaging.org
6
airseacontainers.com
6
southernpackaginglp.com
6
dow.com
5
kellydrums.com
5

In the study as US-listed.

Every question, and where the company came up (2 of 15)
QuestionOpenAIClaudePerplexityGemini
  • Typical price range for industrial packaging products for mid-sized businesses in the US
  • Best industrial packaging solutions for shipping hazardous materials in the US
  • What types of packaging are most suitable for bulk agricultural products?
  • Are recycled-content drums worth it for large-scale manufacturers?
  • Which industrial packaging materials are best for food-grade storage applications?
  • Common problems when storing chemicals in industrial containers
  • How does quantity impact per-unit costs for custom industrial packaging solutions?
  • Alternatives to metal drums for transporting high-viscosity liquids
  • How to prevent leaks in large-capacity shipping barrels
  • Steel drums vs. fiber drums for industrial shipping—how do they compare?
  • Differences between rigid and flexible industrial packaging products
  • What are the most sustainable industrial packaging options for manufacturing businesses?
  • Eco-friendly alternatives to traditional plastic industrial containers
  • What are the leading trends in sustainable industrial packaging solutions in the US?
  • Does investing in customized industrial packaging add value for supply chain efficiency?
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