Rating and ladder placement
Where the brand sits on R1–R7, what is holding it there, and the specific conditions that would move it up or down a rung.
Independent ratings · AI representation
Buyers now meet your company inside an answer, not on your site. What that answer says is unverified, unstable and unattributed. Vizaible runs a fixed, published test across ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude, scores what comes back against your own public record, and issues a rating with every failed check named. We sell the rating. Nothing else.
The reason the rating is worth anything
We don't write your content, build your microsites, run your campaigns or sell you a package to raise the score we just gave you. Those are other people's businesses.
A rating costs the same whatever it says. Nobody at Vizaible is paid more when a subject rates well, and nothing is withheld when it rates badly.
Every check a subject failed is printed in the report, named, with the model response that produced it. Subjects cannot buy an omission, and we hold our own instrument to the same rule.
What you receive
A dashboard tells you a number moved. A rating tells you what was tested, what the models actually returned, which claims failed against your own published record, and what would have to change for the rating to move. Every figure traces back to a logged response you can read.
Where the brand sits on R1–R7, what is holding it there, and the specific conditions that would move it up or down a rung.
Every prompt, provider, model version and raw answer retained and reproducible, with the date and conditions of the run.
Every check that did not pass is named — including checks on our own instrument, where the run fell short of its stated tolerance. This is the part most reports leave out.
How much of the answer space for the category's real buying questions the brand holds, measured against a competitor set agreed before the run.
The scale
Is what the models say about you true? Facts, ownership, footprint, capabilities, and whether the brand is confused with another entity or its parent. Failing here caps everything above it.
Can what you say about yourself be verified anywhere outside your own site, and do the models raise you unprompted when a buyer asks a category question? Each rung above R3 has a stated threshold.
Being right is not enough. A brand whose every claim checks out can still be held at R4, because nothing outside its own website corroborates it and the models never raise it unprompted. Accuracy opens the scale; external corroboration and recall are what move you up it.
How a rating is produced
The order matters and is not negotiable per subject. Scope is frozen before anything is run, so nobody chooses the questions after seeing the answers.
Brand, category, competitor set and the buying questions to be tested are agreed and locked before the first prompt is sent.
The same prompt battery is put to each provider with model versions recorded and temperature at zero, so the run can be repeated and compared.
Responses are checked against the brand's own published record — its site, filings and verifiable third-party sources — not against our opinion of it.
Every flagged item is read by a person before issuance. Borderline calls are recorded as borderline rather than rounded away.
The report goes out with the rating, the evidence log and the complete appendix of failed checks. The subject sees it in the same form anyone else would.
A first read on whether the models know you, and whether what they say is right. Returned in minutes.
Free
The full audit: rating, ladder placement, share of category answers, evidence log and the appendix of every failed check.
On request
A whole category rated on one scale in one window, so positions can be compared rather than asserted.
On request
Request a rating
We also rate on behalf of acquirers and investors doing diligence on how a target is represented in the answer layer.