Skip to content
Answer Stack
Open menu

What kinds of companies benefit most from AEO?

✓ Verified Last reviewed by AnswerStack Next review due Dec 14, 2026

Every claim is sourced below

We'd expect AEO to pay off most for companies whose buyers ask an AI assistant for help before they buy, and that have something specific to tell those buyers. The additional customers it brings in also have to contribute enough, together, to cover the work. Recent surveys show the first condition among B2B software buyers and among US consumers choosing local businesses.

Buyers who ask before they buy

Answer engine optimization helps when buyers put their questions to an AI assistant, so start with whether yours do. Two recent surveys show it for two kinds of buyer.

G2, which runs a software review marketplace, surveyed more than 1,000 B2B software buyers and decision-makers for its 2026 buyer behavior report. It found that 82% had asked an AI chatbot for software recommendations in the previous two years. Half of that group said AI helped most while they were shortlisting and comparing products.

BrightLocal, which sells local SEO tools, asked a representative panel of 1,002 US adults for its 2026 consumer review survey. It reports that 45% had used AI tools for local business recommendations in the last 12 months, up from 6% a year earlier.

The two numbers aren't comparable rates, because the surveys differ in who was asked, what was asked and the period covered. Both report what buyers say they do, and neither measures what a company earned from AEO work.

Something specific to say

Buyer demand only helps a company that has an answer worth using. Google's guide to generative AI features in Search says its systems look at a variety of sources, so a unique point of view helps a page stand out. It contrasts a first-hand review with a summary of what others have already written. It also separates commodity content, which anyone could produce from common knowledge, from content that carries expert or first-hand insight.

So we'd expect companies with real material to have an advantage. That means published prices, a documented process, original data, or people who've done the work and can explain it.

Lean Labs' AEO process shows where that material can come from. Its AEO service starts by turning sales calls, CRM records and Search Console data into a list of buyer questions. It then creates what it calls expert-led answers. A company that already records its sales calls and keeps a CRM has those inputs on hand. A company that would have to guess at its buyers' questions starts further back.

Enough contribution to cover the fees

Agency AEO work has a price, and the customers it brings in have to cover that price out of what they contribute after the cost of serving them.

Lean Labs' published prices make a useful yardstick. Its on-site package is listed at $9,000 one time, with the first year included. Its off-site program is $5,000 a month for ten months, which comes to $50,000 in listed charges.

Suppose a software company keeps $25,000 in the first year from each new customer, after the direct costs of serving them. Two customers who wouldn't have come otherwise match the $50,000 in listed charges. Now suppose a business keeps $250 per customer. It needs 200 such customers to match the same charges. That comparison counts the agency's listed charges and nothing else. Your own staff time and any tools come on top, so it marks a floor for break-even and says nothing about profit.

A small business isn't shut out. A local business can keep its profiles accurate and answer common questions on its own site without a retainer, and we describe that work in what AEO covers beyond website content. We compare agency prices in how much AEO services cost and work through the break-even math in whether AEO is worth it for a B2B SaaS company.

A way to observe what happened

A company that can see what follows the work is in a better position to judge it. Analytics can show visits that arrive from AI assistants, and a CRM records the contacts and deals that came after them. Those records don't prove the AEO work caused a deal that wouldn't have happened anyway. They still let you set the spending beside an outcome, which a count of mentions can't do. We explain the reports in how to track traffic and referrals from AI answer engines, and what a reasonable return looks like in what ROI to expect from AEO.

Where the fit looks weaker

Fit looks weaker as those conditions drop away. When buyers seldom look for advice before choosing, as with many impulse purchases, an assistant has fewer of their questions to answer. When a product is much the same from every seller, it's harder to say something a competitor can't also say.

A business paid by the pageview, such as an ad-funded publisher, has a different problem. When an answer satisfies the reader inside the assistant, the publisher doesn't get the visit it's paid for. A company that sells a product or service is in a different position, because a mention can make a buyer aware of it without a click.

None of this is fixed. BrightLocal's 45% was 6% a year before. If few of your buyers ask an assistant today, we'd check again in a year.

Sources

Google users are less likely to click on links when an AI summary appears in the results

Pew Research Center

Independent Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Behavioral study published July 22, 2025. Browsing data from 900 US adults on the KnowledgePanel Digital panel for March 1 to 31, 2025, covering 68,879 unique Google searches, 12,593 of which produced an AI summary. Supports the 8% versus 15% click rates on traditional results, the 1% click rate on

“Users who encountered an AI summary clicked on a traditional search result link in 8% of all visits. Those who did not encounter an AI summary clicked on a search result nearly twice as often (15% of visits).”

GEO: Generative Engine Optimization

arXiv (Aggarwal et al., KDD 2024)

Independent Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Academic paper, submitted November 16, 2023, revised June 28, 2024, accepted to KDD 2024. Experiments on GEO-Bench, a 10,000-query benchmark, plus the deployed engine Perplexity.ai. Supports visibility gains inside generated responses of up to 40% (up to 37% on Perplexity.ai) and Table 2, where the

“the Cite Sources method led to a substantial 115.1% increase in visibility for websites ranked fifth in SERP, while on average, the visibility of the top-ranked website decreased by 30.3%.”

B2B Buyers Make Zero-Click Buying Number One

Forrester

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Analyst-firm blog post dated January 22, 2026, citing Forrester's 2025 survey of business buyers without publishing sample size or field dates. Supports 94% of business buyers reporting AI use in their buying process, up from 89% a year earlier, and the claim that buyers will spend more of the buyin

“Buyers will spend more and more of their buying process with AI answer engines and less time engaging directly with vendors.”

New G2 Research: Half of B2B Software Buyers Now Start Their Research With AI Chatbots

G2 via PR Newswire

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor press release dated April 15, 2026, reporting an online survey of 1,076 B2B decision makers conducted in March 2026 across North America, EMEA, and APAC. Supports 51% beginning software research in an AI chatbot more often than in Google (29% in April 2025), 69% choosing a different vendor af

“G2 fielded an online survey among 1,076 B2B decision makers ... The survey was conducted in March 2026 and includes a global pool of respondents across North America, EMEA, and APAC.”

Half of consumers are asking AI for business recommendations (Local Consumer Review Survey 2026)

BrightLocal

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor survey published March 10, 2026, fielded through a representative SurveyMonkey panel of 1,002 US adult consumers, with AI-specific cuts based on the 455 respondents who had used an AI tool for local recommendations in the past 12 months. Supports 45% using AI for local business recommendation

“The Local Consumer Review Survey 2026 was conducted using a representative panel of 1,002 US adult consumers via SurveyMonkey.”

Adobe Analytics: Traffic to U.S. retail websites from generative AI sources jumps 1,200 percent

Adobe

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor analytics post published March 17, 2025, based on more than 1 trillion visits to US retail sites plus a companion survey of 5,000 US consumers. Supports 1,200% growth in generative-AI-referred traffic from July 2024 to February 2025, and the conversion finding that this traffic was 9% less li

“When it comes to conversion, traffic from generative AI sources is 9 percent less likely to convert compared to other sources of traffic. However, this has improved significantly from July 2024, when the same number was 43 percent.”

We Studied 200,000 AI Overviews: Here's What We Learned

Semrush

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor study published July 22, 2025 by Luke Harsel, covering 100,000 keywords from the US mobile database and 100,000 from the US desktop database. Supports 80% of desktop AI Overview triggers on informational keywords, transactional keywords at under 3% of triggering keywords, navigational under 2

“Transactional keywords make up less than 3% of all keywords that triggered AI Overviews, and navigational even less (under 2%).”

AI Overviews are expanding across commercial intent search [Study]

Semrush

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor study published July 2, 2026 by Luke Harsel with Anna Yudina and Christine Skopec, covering more than 600,000 keywords in the Semrush US desktop database across 10 industries between November 2025 and April 2026. Supports commercial-intent AI Overview share growing 71%, transactional share fa

“During the six-month study period, the share of commercial SERPs with an AI Overview grew 71%. Meanwhile, the average share of transactional SERPs with an AI Overview fell 5%.”

Semrush study: the impact of AI search on SEO traffic

Semrush

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor study published July 21, 2025 by Rachel Handley, based on over 500 high-value digital marketing and SEO topics and subtopics. Cited here for the claim that an AI search visitor is 4.4 times as valuable as a traditional organic visitor by conversion rate, which the post states without a sample

“The average AI search visitor (tracked to a non-Google search source like ChatGPT) is 4.4 times as valuable as the average visit from traditional organic search, based on conversion rate.”

An Analysis of AI Overview Brand Visibility Factors (75K Brands Studied)

Ahrefs

Supporting Verified Sep 15, 2026 Supports: Vendor correlation study published May 26, 2025 by Louise Linehan with data from Xibeijia Guan. Spearman correlations across 75,000 brands, filtered to domains with Ahrefs Domain Rating above 40 and their highest-volume keyword at 800 or more monthly searches, with the roughly 26% of brands showing

“Roughly 26% had zero mentions, we studied the remaining ~74%. ... correlation does not equal causation.”

Revision history

1 revision since publication
Originally published