LLMaoLLMao

    AI search visibility report · 2026-10-11

    How AI assistants see stratechery.com

    stratechery.com has an AI visibility score of 58/100. The site passed 18 of 34 tests. Its strongest areas are Citation & Source Quality and Content Freshness. The areas to improve are Schema.org Markup and Readability.

    How ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read stratechery.com

    Readability50/100

    Result: weak. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Sentences are too long for optimal LLM parsing, and the reading ease is low.

    Schema.org Markup0/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 5 tests passed.

    Complete absence of JSON-LD schema markup.

    Authority & Trust Signals60/100

    Result: average. 2 of 5 tests passed.

    Strong publication dates and trust pages, but lacks structured author credentials and full contact details.

    Citation & Source Quality100/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.

    Excellent use of outbound links and inline citations to authoritative sources.

    Content Freshness75/100

    Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.

    Content is extremely recent, though explicit update signals like changelogs are missing.

    Content Structure68/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Semantic HTML is good, but the heading hierarchy is broken with too many H1 tags.

    Entity Definition60/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    About page exists, but author identification lacks structured data.

    Technical Accessibility70/100

    Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.

    Good crawler access and JS independence, but missing critical meta description.

    How stratechery.com can improve its AI visibility

    • Implement JSON-LD Schema Markup (high priority)
    • Add Meta Description Tag (high priority)
    • Fix Heading Hierarchy and H1 Usage (medium priority)
    • Enhance Author Entity Definition (medium priority)
    • Improve Sentence Length for Clarity (medium priority)
    • Implement Content Update Signals (low priority)

    How stratechery.com compares to its competitors