Your dashboard is a claim. Your client wants evidence.
For agencies, PR firms, and brand consultancies. AIWorthy provides independent, source-traceable measurement your client did not have to take on faith. You keep the strategy, the creative, the implementation, and the account.
Scoped on a call. No commitment before that.
Independence solves a problem tools cannot
Your clients are already asking what ChatGPT, Google, Claude and Perplexity say about them. Whether you sell search visibility, earned coverage, or a repositioning, the question is the same: did the work reach the system that now answers for your client? A monitoring platform can generate mentions and scores. It cannot make the result independent — especially when the same provider or agency also sells the remedy.
AIWorthy gives you a clean division of labor.
We measure
how the firm is found, described, sourced and recommended, on a question grounded in evidence.
You act
positioning, creative, content, media relations, technical changes, listings — everything the result may justify.
We re-measure
the same questions and platforms at a stated interval, without claiming credit for the work in between.
That is not a criticism of your agency. It is the structure that makes your result more credible.
The renewal conversation
Eleven months in, someone asks whether the program worked. The answer arrives on a dashboard the agency configured, or in a coverage report the agency compiled, scored by a formula no vendor publishes. It may be entirely correct. It is still the agency's number.
That is not a hypothetical failure mode. Across the industry, three-quarters of marketing leaders report abandoning or scaling back initiatives because they could not establish confidence in the measurement, and only about half say they can explain their measurement approach to a board.
Haus Decision Confidence Index, 2026, surveying 500 senior marketing and finance decision-makers, fielded by Sapio Research.
An independent baseline, taken before the work and repeated after it, is the one artifact that survives that conversation — because you did not produce it.
A question your client can inspect
Every AI-visibility result depends on the prompt. If the question is generic, generated, or detached from the firm's actual business, the score can look rigorous while measuring very little.
AIWorthy traces each firm-specific question to a dated public source. Your client can inspect the premise before seeing the answer. The question set is then frozen and fingerprinted before collection begins.
If a client asks why you tested this, you can give them a link — not a rationale invented after the result.
Two baseline studies are in publication. Both panels, both screens, and the collection conditions are already published — including the questions as sent and the fingerprints of every frozen artifact.
Three ways agencies use AIWorthy
The baseline
One firm. A source-derived question. Five AI platforms. Repeated asks, full transcripts, cited sources, competing recommendations, and a hand-verified analysis.
Best for an existing client that needs a defensible starting point.
The cohort read
A defined market measured as a whole, with the panel drawn from a public register rather than a paid or self-selected list. Each firm receives its own evidence-grounded question, and the agency sees the competitive pattern.
Best for a vertical practice, a category study, a market-development effort, or a client that needs context.
The re-measure
The same questions and platforms, repeated after your work at an agreed interval.
Best for showing whether the observable result changed, without asking the team that performed the work to certify itself.
How engagements are scoped
Agencies arrive with different problems. A search practice needs to know whether a client is in the retrievable record at all. A PR firm needs to know whether the coverage it earned reached the systems now answering for its client. A brand consultancy needs to know whether a repositioning took, or whether the machine is still describing the previous version.
Those are different measurements, and they price differently. Every engagement is scoped after a conversation — what the client is, what public record exists to check against, and what question is actually worth asking.
We will tell you when the record does not support the measurement, before you commission anything.
The measurement only works where there is a record we did not write. A registered adviser files a Form ADV. A firm performing federal audit work is named in a mandatory filing. A campaign that produced a named thing — an act, a coalition, a registered day — left something in the world that can be checked.
A positioning statement is not that. Neither is a messaging framework or a set of brand attributes, because the client wrote them, and measuring a machine against a client's own claims produces a marketing finding that wants a marketing fix. Where no external record exists, we can still measure stability and retrieval composition — whether the machine says the same thing twice, and what it is reading. That is a narrower product and it is priced as one.
What citation-level analysis can reveal
A visibility score reports whether a firm appeared. It cannot report how, or why, or what the platform read to get there. Those distinctions change what a response to the finding should be — and they are only visible in the citation record.
There are three ways into an AI answer, and they need different responses.
A firm can be named because a platform read its website, because a directory or association listing carried it, or because the model already held the firm in memory and cited nothing at all. These look identical in a mention count. They are not the same finding, and work that addresses one does nothing for the others.
Being read and being recommended are close to independent.
A firm's site can be consulted repeatedly across a study and the firm never named. Another can be named repeatedly with its website never read. A single visibility score reports those two situations identically, and they call for opposite conclusions.
Sometimes the firm was never in the retrievable record at all.
There is a difference between a platform reading a firm's material and passing over it, and a platform never encountering the firm. The second is not a positioning problem. No amount of positioning work reaches a system that has never retrieved the firm — and knowing which situation you are in before the budget is committed is worth more than the budget.
The question decides which competitive field appears.
A generic category question and a specific buyer situation summon different sets of firms. Some questions produce no local recommendation at all, because the platform routes them to a different profession entirely. The result depends on what was asked, which is why the question has to be traceable to something outside the measurement.
This is the level at which strategy becomes possible. Not "the score went down," but "the system never retrieved the firm," "the evidence did not support a recommendation," or "the question activated the wrong competitive category." Findings from AIWorthy's published studies appear on the Studies page as they are released.
How it appears to your client
You commission it, you deliver it, you present it. The finding carries the AIWorthy name — that attribution is what makes it worth handing over. An independent measurement presented as your own is your own measurement again, which is the problem it was meant to solve.
If a client appears in a published panel, the relationship is disclosed by name in every subsequent wave.
AIWorthy does not write content, build pages, pitch media, manage listings, or compete for implementation work.
Independent measurement for your client. More credible proof for your work.