Back to the study

Interactive Brokers

interactivebrokers.com · Finance · IBKR

Ranked 73 of 2,047 companies in the study

46Overall score
  • Visibility38
  • Citations5
  • Sentiment83
  • Site quality73
  • AI readiness43
What this means for Interactive Brokers

AI assistants name Interactive Brokers in 43.3% of answers, much more often than the typical company in the finance sector. Its overall score is 46 out of 100, ranking 73rd of 2,047, and 3rd in its sector. The website passes 4 of 14 technical checks for how ready it is for AI tools.

We asked 15 unbranded questions about the finance market: none named Interactive Brokers. AI assistants named it in 26 of 60 answers (43.3%). The typical finance company is named in 3.3% of answers. By how often it is named, Interactive Brokers ranks 8 of 205 in its sector.

Named by AI in
43.3%
26 of 60 answers
Share of mentions
28.9%
compared with 5 rivals
AI readiness
4/14
technical checks passed. Typical for its sector: 3
Rank in its sector
3 of 205
by overall score, where the typical finance company scores 29
How Interactive Brokers 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
38

How often AI assistants name the company

Citations
5

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

Sentiment
83

How positively AI describes the company

Site quality
73

How well built the website's own pages are

AI readiness
43

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 finance

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

Overall score46
Ranks 3 of 205. Typical company: 29
Named in answers43%
Ranks 8 of 205. Typical company: 3%
AI readiness43
Ranks 2 of 205. Typical company: 21
What Claude actually said

An answer that names the company

“Are low-commission brokerage platforms reliable for frequent traders?”

I'll search for current information about low-commission brokerage platforms and their reliability for frequent traders.Based on recent information, low-commission brokerage platforms can be reliable for frequent traders, but reliability varies by platform and depends on several factors:

General Reliability

Low-commission platforms provide efficient, reliable execution and essential tools, perfect for active traders. Many established firms have demonstrated solid performance, with online platforms in 2025 and 2026 continuing to improve their pricing models by offering tight spreads, low c …

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

Also named
Charles Schwab12E*TRADE8TradeStation4TD Ameritrade1Fidelity Investments1
Share of mentions

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

Interactive Brokers
30.6%
Charles Schwab
25.9%
Fidelity Investments
17.6%
E*TRADE
12.9%
TradeStation
8.2%
TD Ameritrade
4.7%
Which AI assistants named the company

Answers naming it, out of answers received

Perplexity
10/15
Gemini
7/15
OpenAI
5/15
Claude
4/15
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
25 of 100
  • Markdown negotiationNot met

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

    study: 1.9%
  • llms.txtPartly 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 31 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.interactivebrokers.com · 2,047 companies scanned

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

The checks behind the AI readiness score

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 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%
  • Passedllms.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
  • GPTBotpartly
  • ClaudeBotpartly
  • Anthropic-AIpartly
  • Google-Extendedpartly
  • Applebot-Extendedpartly
  • Meta-ExternalAgentpartly
  • FacebookBotpartly
  • Bytespiderpartly
  • CCBotpartly
  • Diffbotpartly
  • Omgilibotpartly
AI search
  • OAI-SearchBotpartly
  • Claude-SearchBotpartly
  • PerplexityBotpartly
  • Applebotpartly
  • Amazonbotpartly
  • YouBotpartly
Answering questions
  • ChatGPT-Userpartly
  • 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

interactivebrokers.com (its own website)
33
investopedia.com
29
forbes.com
24
schwab.com
24
fidelity.com
18
nerdwallet.com
17
stockbrokers.com
16
finder.com
9
fool.com
8
kiplinger.com
8

In the study as S&P 500.

Every question, and where the company came up (10 of 15)
QuestionOpenAIClaudePerplexityGemini
  • How can financial advisors efficiently manage multiple client accounts online?
  • How can I resolve issues with margin requirements or buying power on a trading platform?
  • Are low-commission brokerage platforms reliable for frequent traders?
  • Why are my market orders not executing instantly on my online trading account?
  • Which trading platforms offer global market access for both stocks and options?
  • What are some non-brokerage options for trading currencies from the US?
  • What are typical commission rates for online trading platforms in the US for stocks and options?
  • What are the best online brokerage platforms for active traders seeking low commissions in the US?
  • What’s the best way to manage multiple securities across different global exchanges with one brokerage account?
  • What are the major differences between discount and full-service brokerage accounts for investors?
  • Is it worth using a brokerage platform that offers direct access to futures and currencies for US investors?
  • How do professional trading platforms compare to basic investing apps in terms of features and market access?
  • Which platforms outside of traditional brokerages support trading in prediction markets and alternative assets?
  • What are alternatives to online brokerage platforms for investing in international markets?
  • Are there online brokerages with transparent account fees and no inactivity charges?
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.

Share this result
Overall score 46 of 100 badge for Interactive Brokers

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/interactivebrokers.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/interactivebrokers.com.svg" alt="Overall score 46 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>
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