LLMaoLLMao

    AI search visibility report · 2026-10-30

    How AI assistants see july.com

    july.com has an AI visibility score of 40/100. The site passed 12 of 34 tests. Its strongest areas are Technical Accessibility and Content Structure. The areas to improve are Content Freshness and Schema.org Markup.

    How ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read july.com

    Readability60/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Sentences are too long for optimal LLM processing, though clarity is acceptable.

    Schema.org Markup0/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 5 tests passed.

    No JSON-LD schema markup detected on the page.

    Authority & Trust Signals46/100

    Result: weak. 2 of 5 tests passed.

    Contact and trust pages are present, but publication dates and author credentials are missing.

    Citation & Source Quality30/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.

    Lacks authoritative outbound links and inline citations for product claims.

    Content Freshness0/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.

    No visible or machine-readable dates found on the homepage.

    Content Structure65/100

    Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.

    Good use of sections, but heading hierarchy has skipped levels and semantic HTML is limited.

    Entity Definition35/100

    Result: weak. 1 of 4 tests passed.

    Missing a dedicated about page and author identification. Entity consistency is good.

    Technical Accessibility95/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.

    Excellent crawler access and meta tag implementation. Content is accessible without JS.

    How july.com can improve its AI visibility

    • Implement JSON-LD Schema Markup (high priority)
    • Add Publication and Modification Dates (high priority)
    • Include Authoritative Citations (medium priority)
    • Create a Comprehensive About Page (medium priority)
    • Optimize Sentence Length and Clarity (medium priority)

    How july.com compares to its competitors