AI search visibility report · 2026-06-05
How AI assistants see serif.com
serif.com has an AI visibility score of 60/100. The site passed 19 of 34 tests. Its strongest areas are Technical Accessibility and Readability. The areas to improve are Content Freshness and Authority & Trust Signals.
How ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read serif.com
Readability85/100
Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.
Excellent sentence length and clarity, though the reading ease is slightly below the ideal 60-70 range.
Schema.org Markup74/100
Result: average. 4 of 5 tests passed.
Valid Organization schema present, but missing critical Product and SoftwareApplication schemas.
Authority & Trust Signals28/100
Result: weak. 0 of 5 tests passed.
Lacks physical contact details and publication dates, though social proof is implied via the Canva association.
Citation & Source Quality67/100
Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.
High volume of internal/product links but lacks external authoritative citations to industry standards or research.
Content Freshness0/100
Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.
No dates found in metadata or visible text, making it difficult for LLMs to determine recency.
Content Structure62/100
Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.
Good use of semantic HTML but penalized for multiple H1 tags and poor paragraph length distribution.
Entity Definition70/100
Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.
Strong brand consistency and About page, but lacks Person schema for authors/leadership.
Technical Accessibility95/100
Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.
Excellent crawler access and social metadata; content is highly accessible without JavaScript.
How serif.com can improve its AI visibility
- Implement Visible Publication Dates (high priority)
- Expand Content Schemas (high priority)
- Enhance Contact Transparency (medium priority)
- Fix Heading Hierarchy (medium priority)
- Implement Author Person Schema (low priority)
How serif.com compares to its competitors
- Adobe (adobe.com) — score 79/100
- CorelDraw (corel.com) — score 39/100
- Pixelmator (pixelmator.com) — score 65/100
- Figma (figma.com) — score 79/100