- Visibility15
- Citations1
- Sentiment75
- Site quality93
- AI readiness29
AI assistants name Rubrik in 11.7% of answers. This is slightly more often than the typical company in its sector, which is named in 10% of answers. Rubrik's overall score is 38 out of 100, ranking 566th of 2,047 companies. The company's website passes 4 of 14 technical checks for AI tool readiness.
We asked 15 unbranded questions about the technology market: none named Rubrik. AI assistants named it in 7 of 60 answers (11.7%). The typical technology company is named in 10.0% of answers. By how often it is named, Rubrik ranks 121 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
“How does agentic cyber resilience compare to standard automated cybersecurity platforms for large organizations?”
Short answer
"Agentic cyber resilience" uses autonomous, goal-driven AI agents (single or multi‑agent systems) that sense, decide, act, and adapt across an environment to contain, recover from, and proactively reshape responses to attacks. It is a step beyond scripted automation or human-in-the-loop AI assistance. (microsoft.com)
How they compare — at a glance
Decision model
Standard automated platforms: rule- and playbook-driven automation + ML-assisted detection; huma …
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
The website turns away requests that do not come from a browser. AI agents that say what they are meet the same refusal.
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.txtPartly 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 31 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.rubrik.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%
- Passedllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
- PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
- Not metExplicit 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 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.
- GPTBotpartly
- ClaudeBotpartly
- Anthropic-AIpartly
- Google-Extendedpartly
- Applebot-Extendedpartly
- Meta-ExternalAgentpartly
- FacebookBotpartly
- Bytespiderpartly
- CCBotpartly
- Diffbotpartly
- Omgilibotpartly
- OAI-SearchBotpartly
- Claude-SearchBotpartly
- PerplexityBotpartly
- Applebotpartly
- Amazonbotpartly
- YouBotpartly
- 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.
How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers
In the study as US-listed.
- How do organizations secure both data and AI operations against cyber threats using a unified platform?
- How does agentic cyber resilience compare to standard automated cybersecurity platforms for large organizations?
- What are the best zero-trust data security platforms for large enterprises seeking cyber resilience?
- Which platforms offer the fastest data recovery after a cyber attack for US-based enterprises?
- What are the best practices for integrating data security platforms with existing cloud infrastructure?
- What alternatives exist to agentic cyber resilience platforms for midsize and large enterprises?
- Zero-trust data protection vs traditional backup solutions: which is better for cyber attack recovery?
- Is investing in an enterprise-grade zero-trust data security solution worth it for organizations with sensitive data?
- How do organizations address slow data recovery times after a ransomware attack using a cyber resilience platform?
- Common challenges when using unified data and identity protection platforms in complex IT environments?
- Best alternatives to unified data and AI protection platforms for organizations seeking simpler solutions?
- What should large enterprises consider before purchasing a cyber resilience platform?
- How can a zero-trust cyber resilience platform help prevent insider threats in organizations?
- What is the typical cost range for enterprise zero-trust data security platforms in the US?
- How do pricing models work for advanced cyber resilience and data protection solutions?
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/rubrik.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/rubrik.com.svg" alt="Overall score 38 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>