Skip to main content

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://decageo.ai/docs/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

Semrush is number 1 in SEO. It’s also number 1 in GEO. That makes it easy to assume the two categories are the same list with a different label. They’re not. We compared AI recommendation data for both categories — 57 brands in SEO, 147 brands in GEO. The overlap is 15 brands. That’s 26% of the SEO list and just 10% of the GEO list. The other 132 brands that AI recommends for GEO don’t appear in SEO at all. And 42 brands that AI recommends for SEO — including Moz, BrightEdge, and SE Ranking — are invisible in GEO. In a separate analysis, we showed that AI recommends only 8.4% of software products across 10 categories. This article asks a different question: when AI does recommend brands, does it recommend the same ones across related categories — or different ones?

​
Definitions

SEO (Search Engine Optimization) is the practice of improving a website’s visibility in traditional search engine results — primarily Google. SEO tools help practitioners with keyword research, technical audits, backlink analysis, rank tracking, and on-page optimization. G2 currently lists 776 SEO software products. The category has existed for over two decades, with established leaders and well-defined boundaries. GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) is an emerging discipline focused on improving a brand’s visibility in AI-generated responses — such as ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity. The term was formalized in academic research at KDD 2024 and has since been adopted by the marketing industry. Gartner predicts that traditional search engine volume will drop 25% by 2026 due to AI chatbots and virtual agents. G2 currently lists 338 GEO software products. The category is less than two years old. On May 15, 2026, Google Search Central published a guide stating that GEO is “still SEO” from Google’s perspective. This article tests that claim against empirical data.

​
Key Findings

Summary for citation: Across 57 SEO-ranked brands and 147 GEO-ranked brands tracked in AI recommendations, only 15 appear in both categories (26.3% overlap from the SEO side, 10.2% from the GEO side). Content-optimization tools gain DECA Score when crossing from SEO to GEO; technical-infrastructure tools lose. 14 of GEO’s top 20 brands have no presence in SEO rankings. Data retrieved May 19, 2026, from ChatGPT (GPT-5.4, US region).

​
The Overlap Map

We matched the SEO and GEO brand lists by name to identify which brands appear in both, which are exclusive to one, and how their DECA Scores compare across contexts.

​
SEO-only brands

42 brands (73.7% of SEO list). These include SE Ranking, BrightLocal, Mangools, BrightEdge, seoClarity, and Moz. AI recommends them for SEO but not for GEO — even though some offer features that overlap with GEO use cases.

​
Overlap brands

15 brands (26.3% of SEO, 10.2% of GEO). Semrush, Ahrefs, Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse, Lumar, Screaming Frog, Google, Conductor, Botify, Yext, Birdeye, Similarweb, Yoast.

​
GEO-only brands

132 brands (89.8% of GEO list). Otterly.AI, Scrunch AI, Peec AI, Profound, AthenaHQ, and 127 more. These brands exist only in the GEO category — AI doesn’t associate them with SEO at all.

​
The 15 Overlap Brands: Same Brand, Different Score

The 15 brands that appear in both SEO and GEO don’t score the same in each. AI evaluates the same product differently depending on context.
BrandSEO RankSEO DECAGEO RankGEO DECAScore Shift
Semrush1100.01100.0—
Ahrefs256.6471.6+15.0
Lumar1710.21119.0+8.7
Birdeye273.92812.1+8.2
Surfer1313.71516.4+2.7
Clearscope815.61417.2+1.6
Frase1114.61715.5+0.9
MarketMuse1413.22213.8+0.6
Yext217.8616.0-1.8
Screaming Frog616.1408.6-7.5
Botify1510.71171.7-9.0
Conductor1114.6774.3-10.3
Google524.4349.5-14.9
Two patterns emerge. Content-optimization tools (Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse) gain or hold steady in GEO — their function translates naturally. Technical-infrastructure tools (Screaming Frog, Botify, Conductor) lose heavily — their function is SEO-specific and doesn’t map to how AI evaluates GEO relevance.

​
Three Hypotheses, Tested Against the Data

​
H1: The Native Channel Hypothesis

GEO tools dominate the GEO category because they were built for AI discovery Of the GEO top 20 brands, 14 are GEO-only — they don’t appear in SEO rankings at all. The GEO category’s leaderboard is not inherited from SEO. It’s being built by a different set of brands. The GEO-only brands that dominate the top positions:
  • Otterly.AI — tied for 1st, DECA 100.0
  • Scrunch AI — 3rd, DECA 75.0
  • Peec AI — 5th, DECA 66.4
  • Profound — 6th, DECA 31.9
  • AthenaHQ — 7th, DECA 29.3
None of these brands rank in SEO. They were born in the AI era, built for the AI channel, and they’re winning in it. The exception: Semrush (tied 1st with Otterly.AI) and Ahrefs (4th) prove that brand authority can transfer across categories — but only for the very top. Below the top 5, GEO-native brands dominate. Implication: The GEO leaderboard is being defined by AI-native brands, not inherited from SEO incumbents.

​
H2: The Crossover Tax Hypothesis

AI treats the same brand differently in SEO vs. GEO contexts There’s no universal tax. The average DECA Score for overlap brands is nearly identical across categories (SEO: 20.2, GEO: 20.3). But this average masks a sharp divergence at the individual level. Winners in GEO (score goes up):
  • Ahrefs: SEO 56.6 to GEO 71.6 (+15.0)
  • Lumar: SEO 10.2 to GEO 19.0 (+8.7)
  • Birdeye: SEO 3.9 to GEO 12.1 (+8.2)
Losers in GEO (score drops):
  • Google: SEO 24.4 to GEO 9.5 (-14.9)
  • Conductor: SEO 14.6 to GEO 4.3 (-10.3)
  • Botify: SEO 10.7 to GEO 1.7 (-9.0)
The pattern: content-layer tools gain, infrastructure-layer tools lose. Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse — tools that help create and optimize content — translate to GEO because GEO is fundamentally about content visibility in AI. Screaming Frog, Botify, Conductor — tools that crawl and audit websites — don’t translate because GEO isn’t about site structure. Implication: Whether a tool’s core function translates across categories depends on what layer it operates on. Content-layer functions transfer; infrastructure-layer functions don’t.

​
H3: The Window Hypothesis

Low overlap proves GEO is a genuinely new category — and the window is still open Google’s May 2026 guide states that GEO is “still SEO.” If that were true at the market level, the overlap between SEO and GEO brand lists should be high — 70% or more. Overlap is 26.3% from the SEO side and 10.2% from the GEO side. Not 70%. The strongest evidence: major SEO brands completely absent from GEO:
  • SE Ranking — 3rd in SEO, not in GEO
  • BrightLocal — 4th in SEO, not in GEO
  • BrightEdge — 8th in SEO, not in GEO
  • seoClarity — 10th in SEO, not in GEO
  • Moz — 20th in SEO, not in GEO
Meanwhile, 132 brands in GEO exist only in GEO. Otterly.AI, Scrunch AI, Peec AI, AthenaHQ — they didn’t migrate from SEO. They started here. Implication: The data supports treating GEO as a distinct category from SEO — because the competitive landscape, the dominant brands, and the tools that succeed are fundamentally different.

​
What This Means for Practitioners

​
1. Audit your current tool stack against both categories

Only content-layer tools (Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse) maintain or improve their standing in GEO. If your stack is built on infrastructure-layer tools (crawlers, technical auditors, rank trackers), you may need separate tools for GEO.

​
2. Identify whether you’re on the content layer or the infrastructure layer

Every content-layer tool gained or held steady crossing from SEO to GEO. Every infrastructure-layer tool lost — some catastrophically (Botify: 15th to 117th). Content-layer functions transfer; infrastructure-layer functions don’t.

​
3. Assess the competitive landscape in your specific category

The SEO-to-GEO pattern likely repeats wherever a new AI-adjacent category emerges next to an established one. The overlap will be low, the incumbents will be slow, and the window will be temporary.

​
Methodology

Data collection: Hundreds of recommendation-seeking prompts were sent to ChatGPT (GPT-5.4 model) with US region settings during the week of May 12 to 18, 2026. Each prompt asked for software recommendations in either the SEO or GEO category. Every brand that appeared in at least one response was recorded. DECA Score: A normalized score (0 to 100) measuring a brand’s relative frequency and prominence in AI recommendations within a category. A score of 100.0 means the brand appeared most frequently and prominently; lower scores reflect proportionally less visibility. Overlap analysis: The SEO and GEO brand lists were matched by exact brand name. “Overlap brands” appear in both lists. Score Shift is calculated as GEO DECA minus SEO DECA. Limitations: This analysis tracks a single AI platform (ChatGPT) in a single region (US) during a single week. AI recommendations can vary across platforms (Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Claude), regions, and time periods.

​
FAQ

SEO focuses on improving visibility in traditional search engine results, primarily Google. GEO focuses on improving visibility in AI-generated responses, such as ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity. Empirical data shows only 26.3% of SEO-ranked brands appear in GEO rankings, and 89.8% of GEO-ranked brands are exclusive to GEO.
Out of 57 brands AI recommends for SEO and 147 brands AI recommends for GEO, only 15 appear in both categories — an overlap rate of 26.3% from the SEO side and 10.2% from the GEO side. The 15 overlap brands are Semrush, Ahrefs, Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse, Lumar, Screaming Frog, Google, Conductor, Botify, Yext, Birdeye, Similarweb, and Yoast.
Content-optimization tools consistently outperform technical-infrastructure tools in GEO. Every content-layer tool (Surfer, Clearscope, Frase, MarketMuse) gained or maintained its DECA Score crossing from SEO to GEO. Every infrastructure-layer tool (Screaming Frog, Botify, Conductor) lost significantly.
GEO is fundamentally about how AI perceives and recommends brands based on content signals — not site structure. Infrastructure-layer tools optimize technical mechanics — crawling, indexing, site speed — that influence traditional search rankings but don’t directly affect how AI models evaluate brand relevance.
The data supports treating GEO as a separate category: (1) only 26.3% of SEO brands appear in GEO; (2) 14 of GEO’s top 20 brands have zero presence in SEO rankings; (3) major SEO brands like Moz, BrightEdge, SE Ranking, and seoClarity are completely absent from GEO.
Not automatically. 42 out of 57 SEO-ranked brands (73.7%) don’t appear in GEO rankings at all. SEO brand authority transfers only for the very top brands: Semrush holds number 1 in both, and Ahrefs ranks 2nd in SEO and 4th in GEO.
All data comes from weekly AI recommendation tracking, retrieved on May 19, 2026. The tracking uses ChatGPT (GPT-5.4 model) with US region settings. This analysis covers a single AI platform in a single region; results may differ on Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Claude, or in other regions.

​
Sources