GEO agency vs AEO agency vs LLM SEO agency: what's the difference?

What does each agency name mean?

An AEO agency aims to help your business appear in answers from AI and other answer tools. Answer engine optimization, or AEO, means making your business easy for those tools to find, understand and name. A citation is a link to your page or a named source in an answer. The work should serve people who have a real question, not just a chart of brand mentions.

A GEO agency uses the term generative engine optimization for work aimed at AI-generated answers. A generative engine builds an answer from information it has access to. Google describes both AEO and GEO as terms for work on visibility in AI search. For its own search experience, Google says this work is still search engine optimization, or SEO.

LLM SEO refers to search work aimed at large language models. An LLM is a system trained to work with language, including the models behind many AI tools. The phrase does not tell you which products a vendor covers or which business goals it will measure. Ask for those details in writing before you compare bids.

Example: A firm gets one proposal titled GEO and another titled AEO. The first covers only Google, while the second also sets out a plan for ChatGPT. The titles alone do not reveal that difference. The firm can compare the actual scope, proof and reports side by side.

The GEO name also has a research history. A published research paper used the term for a study of how material appears in generated answers. A research benchmark does not establish what an agency can deliver for your brand. Compare the proposed services with the scope named in each bid.

What should an agency actually deliver?

You should receive a clear scope tied to the questions and markets that matter to your business. Start with the people you want to reach and the choices they are trying to make. A useful proposal names the services, locations, audiences and pages in scope. It also names what is excluded, so you can see the work your own team must cover.

The scope should say which AI experiences the agency will assess. Google AI Overviews are AI-written summaries that appear in some Google results. ChatGPT search is a separate experience. A vendor that only checks one cannot use that check to prove how your brand appears everywhere. Ask for each platform to be named, along with the reason it matters to your buyers.

Example: A business serves several cities but has one national service page. Its buyer wants an agency to cover local questions as well as broad ones. A useful proposal says which places and services are included and who will confirm each local fact. That gives both sides a shared boundary for the work.

Ask what you will own at the end. You may need approved page copy, a list of changes, source records and a plain-language report. The agency should say whether it can make changes or only suggest them. If your team must publish the work, agree on who can approve copy and who can make site changes.

Also ask how the work fits with your existing search and brand teams. A new label does not remove the need for clear roles. Your legal team may need to approve claims, while local teams may need to confirm hours or service areas. Put those handoffs in the scope so that a delay does not become a surprise.

A good outcome is a site and a set of business facts that help a buyer make a sound choice. An agency can help you identify gaps and propose fixes. It cannot control every answer an AI tool gives. Use the proposed page changes and source records to assess the work.

Do the same rules apply to every AI tool?

No. Each platform has its own access rules and reporting limits. Google says there are no extra requirements or special markup needed for its AI features. A page must be indexed, meaning Google has stored it for search, and eligible to show a snippet. That makes it eligible for consideration; it does not ensure it will appear.

OpenAI says OAI-SearchBot helps surface websites in ChatGPT search. A site that blocks that crawler will not be shown in ChatGPT search answers, though it can still appear as a navigation link. Allowing the crawler is an access choice, not a promise of a citation. The choice about search access is also distinct from the choice about a training crawler.

Example: A buyer receives a pitch that promises one file will unlock every AI answer. The buyer asks for the named platforms and the official rules behind the claim. The Google guidance does not require a special AI text file for its search features. That makes the broad pitch a poor basis for signing a contract.

Ask an agency to explain any access change in terms your web and security teams can review. Who owns the site setting? What content would become available? Can the change be reversed if it conflicts with your policy? Those are business choices as well as technical choices, and the answers can differ across platforms.

Be wary of a fixed recipe said to work in all answers. Google says there is no ideal page length and no need to write in a special way just for its generative AI search. It also says no outside tool has access to its internal ranking or AI systems. A vendor should be able to separate a documented rule from a judgment or test.

Your own content still matters. A page that answers a real question and gives accurate detail helps the person who reads it. It gives your team a concrete asset to review and improve. For ChatGPT search access, review the setting for OAI-SearchBot with your web and security teams.

How can you judge proof and results?

Judge proof by the question it answers, the source behind it and its limits. In July 2026, the founder closed over $100,000 in commission and attributes it to AEO work on his own sites. That is one founder’s result in one month. It is not an average or a forecast for your business.

Ask any agency for a case that matches your goal as closely as it can. A useful case explains the starting point, the work covered, the time period and the result. It also tells you where the result came from. A screenshot can show what was visible for a search at a point in time; it does not prove a lasting position across all users and searches.

Example: An agency shows a page linked in an AI answer. The buyer asks which question was used, when it was checked and whether the page received visits. The answer can support a narrow citation claim. It cannot by itself show that the page brought a sale.

Separate a mention from a citation, a visit and a sale. A mention is a name in an answer. A citation points to a source. A visit is a person reaching a site, and a sale is a business event. Each can be useful, but each answers a different question. Agree on the measures you care about before work begins.

Bing’s AI Performance preview reports citation frequency, which is different from rank or placement.

When a report claims a lead or sale, ask how the team tied it to the source. A buyer may use several channels before making contact, and a form may not reveal every step. Your team can still track leads and sales, but the report should say what is known and what remains unclear. Keep the source and definition beside each lead or sale in the report.

How should you compare agency proposals?

Compare proposals against the same brief, not against the name on the cover. Give each vendor the same business goal, markets, key services and access limits. Ask each to set out its work, team, measures and assumptions. A shared brief makes gaps much easier to see than a set of custom pitches.

Example: A marketing lead asks two firms to cover the same services and locations. One includes page changes, while the other only supplies advice. The quotes may look alike until the lead asks who will publish the work. That distinction helps the lead plan internal time and compare the real scope.

Ask who will do the work and who can answer questions about it. You should know your point of contact, how often you will receive updates and how issues reach the right person. Google suggests asking prospective search providers how they communicate, what they measure and whether they will share changes and reasons.

Ask for a sample report with its terms defined. A strong sample makes clear what was checked, when it was checked, what changed and what remains uncertain. It should give you enough detail to challenge a claim or ask a useful follow-up. A polished score with no source or definition is harder to use.

Compare fees by the work included, without assuming a label sets the price. Scope can change with the number of sites, markets, languages, pages and people involved. Ask whether review, publishing, reporting and later changes are included. If a quote leaves a task to your staff, count that time in your own decision.

Put the agreed scope and reporting terms in the contract. Include who owns the work, who approves changes, how access is handled and what happens when the term ends. Ask how either side can raise a concern or change the brief. Use the buyer checklist below to record the terms beside each proposal.

What claims should make you pause?

Pause when a vendor promises a rank, a citation or a fixed business result. Google says no one can guarantee a top ranking on Google. The same care applies to a promise that an outside agency controls an AI answer. Ask what the vendor can do, what it can measure and which choices stay with the platform.

Example: A proposal says your brand will be named for every key question. Ask the vendor to show the basis for that promise and put the limits in writing. If the pitch relies on secret access to a search platform, ask for proof. Google says outside tools do not have access to its internal ranking or AI systems.

Look closely at proposed shortcuts. Google treats pages made at scale mainly to manipulate search rankings, without helping users, as spam. Its policy also covers buying or selling links for ranking purposes. A vendor should explain what it plans to publish and how the work helps the person who finds it.

Secrecy is another reason to slow down. Google advises care when a provider will not explain what it intends to do. You do not need to be a search expert to ask for a clear account of changes, access and risk. Your team should be able to review a proposed change before it goes live.

Finally, do not let an invented standard decide the hire. Ask a vendor what training and past work it has, then check the evidence. A badge or a new title is not a substitute for a clear scope, sound examples and a report you can understand. Compare those items with the proposed scope before you sign.

What should you ask before you sign?

• Name the audiences, services and markets in scope.
• List each platform and explain how results will be checked.
• Show relevant past work and the limits of each result.
• Define the work your team must approve or publish.
• Explain fees, ownership, access and exit terms.
• Give a sample report with sources and plain definitions.

Example: A buyer can use this list in a vendor meeting and record the answers beside each proposal. Ask the same questions of each firm so the differences are clear.