Our methodology page explains how we measure. This page explains everything else — who does what, what happens each month, and the lines we won’t cross. If a vendor can’t describe their delivery this plainly, ask why.
When we say we run your 75 prompts across five engines, we mean a trained analyst asking the actual consumer products — the same ChatGPT, Perplexity, Copilot, Claude, and Google AI Overviews your buyers use. Not API shortcuts. That distinction matters more than it sounds: what an engine’s API returns is often not what a buyer sees in the product, and some answer surfaces have no API at all. Measuring the wrong surface precisely is still measuring the wrong thing.
Every observation is logged the moment it’s run: timestamp, engine, prompt, the full answer, every brand named, every source linked, and how you were characterized. That log — roughly 1,125 rows a month — ships to you with every report. The division of labor is deliberate: analysts capture what buyers actually see, because fidelity demands a human; software tallies, cross-checks, and trends what they capture, because consistency demands a machine. We automate the math, never the looking.
The judgment calls are governed by a written scoring rubric — what counts as a mention, how sentiment is bucketed, what happens when an engine answers a question with a question — so two analysts score the same answer the same way. We publish the rubric, because a score you can’t reproduce is a score you shouldn’t trust.
And the humans don’t work alone. Around the analyst runs sits a full technical stack — the instrument panel that extends what the humans see and double-checks what they record:
Three reasonable pushbacks we hear, taken seriously instead of dodged:
This firm was founded by a practitioner who spent a decade reverse-engineering ranking systems for a living — because that’s what serious SEO always was: forming hypotheses about an opaque algorithm, testing them against real results, and discarding what the data killed. When answer engines emerged, we brought that same discipline to the new black box: systematic observation of how these systems select sources, resolve brands, and build consensus — run on our own properties first, with our own money at stake, before we ever charged a client for the findings.
That history is why this page reads the way it does. We’ve watched every “algorithm-beating secret” of the last ten years die at the next update — and the practitioners who survived every one of those updates were the ones betting on fundamentals, measurement, and legitimacy. We’re not new to studying opaque systems. We’re new to an industry that finally makes showing your work a competitive advantage.
The program runs on a few things only you can provide. In month one: two hours with someone who talks to your buyers — sales calls, objection logs, lost-deal notes are where the real prompts come from — plus site access for the technical layer and sign-off on the prompt set that becomes your fixed ruler.
Ongoing: timely content approvals, introductions to happy customers when we run review campaigns, and a subject-matter voice (often fifteen minutes of an expert’s time) when commentary opportunities land. That’s the whole ask — and it’s why the guarantee’s third condition exists: the roadmap has to actually run to be guaranteed.
Every month, from us: the re-run report with your trend line, what we did, what moved, and what’s queued next. Fifteen minutes to read; one call a month if you want it; a board-ready deck each quarter.
The program & guarantee →