LLMaoLLMao

    AI search visibility report · 2026-11-01

    How AI assistants see opera.com

    opera.com has an AI visibility score of 63/100. The site passed 21 of 34 tests. Its strongest areas are Technical Accessibility and Content Structure. The areas to improve are Content Freshness and Authority & Trust Signals.

    How ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read opera.com

    Readability50/100

    Result: weak. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Sentences are too long and complex for optimal LLM parsing.

    Schema.org Markup80/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 5 tests passed.

    Core technical schemas are perfect, but content-specific schemas (FAQ, Article) are missing.

    Authority & Trust Signals50/100

    Result: weak. 2 of 5 tests passed.

    Strong legal and contact foundations, but lacks individual expert attribution and social proof schema.

    Citation & Source Quality74/100

    Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.

    Good use of internal and descriptive links, but lacks citations to high-authority external domains.

    Content Freshness0/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.

    No visible or machine-readable dates found, making content appear static to LLMs.

    Content Structure81/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.

    Excellent heading hierarchy and semantic tag usage. Paragraphs are concise.

    Entity Definition60/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Strong brand identity and about page, but lacks specific author entities.

    Technical Accessibility100/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.

    Perfect technical setup for AI crawlers and social sharing.

    How opera.com can improve its AI visibility

    • Implement Visible Publication Dates (high priority)
    • Define Author Entities with Person Schema (high priority)
    • Add FAQPage Content Schema (medium priority)
    • Cite Authoritative External Sources (medium priority)
    • Improve Content Readability Scores (low priority)

    How opera.com compares to its competitors