// Leaderboard · open dataset · 390 companies

Who gets cited
by ChatGPT?

The Agent Readability Score ranks 390 AI companies across infra, models, agents, and dev tools on how cleanly their site is parsed by ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude. Scored across five signals: semantic HTML, JSON-LD coverage, llms.txt, citability, and first-contentful speed.

// Sites in view
246
// Average score
57/100
// Agent-native (85+)
0
// Opaque (<55)
105
GET /api/public/leaderboard.jsonMethodology →Standard v1 →Embed badge →// CC BY 4.0 · re-scored weekly

// What the 390-site dataset shows · cite as grow.contact/leaderboard

  • 63% of 390 AI companies are missing or under-serving llms.txt.
  • 67% ship insufficient JSON-LD for reliable AI citation.
  • 13% clear the agent-native bar (score ≥ 85).
  • 27% score below 55 — effectively opaque to ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude.
  • 66% fail the first-byte speed threshold AI crawlers timeout against.
  • Dev Tools leads at 72/100 average; Agents trails at 57/100.

Filter leaderboard by category or signal failure

// Category:All (390)Infra (82)Models (87)Agents (103)Dev Tools (118)
// Failing signal:AnyWeak semantic HTMLWeak JSON-LDMissing llms.txtLow citabilitySlow first byte

Ranked AI sites by agent readability score

// Methodology: weighted across semantic HTML (25), JSON-LD (20), llms.txt (15), citability (20), first-contentful speed (20). Flagship rows hand-scored; long-tail rows re-scored weekly. Click any row for the live verdict.

// Is your site here?

Score your site
in under a minute.

Free scan. Semantic HTML, JSON-LD, llms.txt, citability, speed. See where you'd rank against 390 AI companies.

Run /check→Rebuild agent-native