GEO report · public sharing
sandvik.com
Technical AI readiness measured using Geoa’s free GEO-test — 15 dimensions that determine whether ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity can read, understand and quote the site.
Last scanned: 2026-10-09 · Back to the benchmark
81.6
/100
Grade: B
Strong technical AI readiness — the site is easy for AI search engines to read and cite. Dimensions marked ‘not measured’ are treated as neutral, typically because the site blocks automatic measurements.
Strong technical AI readiness — the site is easy for AI search engines to read and cite. Dimensions marked ‘not measured’ are treated as neutral, typically because the site blocks automatic measurements.
Your Google visibility
87/100
Grade B
Your AI visibility
85/100
Grade B
The 15 dimensions
🤖 AI Crawler Accessibility
100
No issues found ✓
🖥️ Server-Side Rendering
100
- Content appears in HTML — SSR friendly ✓
📄 llms.txt
100
- llms.txt follows the llmstxt.org spec ✓
- Ingen /llms-full.txt — anbefalet supplement til llms.txt med fuld sideindholdsindeks. llms-full.txt øger citering på Claude og ChatGPT ved at give dem adgang til komplet kontekst.
📊 Structured Data
50
- Missing WebSite schema — helps AI identify the website's role
📝 Basic Page Signals
86
- Meta description length: 195 characters (optimal: 25-160)
- Manglende Open Graph / Social Sharing tags — AI-crawlere (Perplexity, ChatGPT plugins) bruger og:title og og:description til entitetsgenkendelse og uddrag. Mangler: Mangler twitter:card/twitter:title meta-tags
💬 Content Citability
75
- Only 0/12 headings are questions (0%) — recommend 10%+
- Few highlighted key terms — bold text guides AI attention
🏷️ Brand Entity
100
No issues found ✓
🔒 Security
100
- Security-headers kunne ikke måles (HTTP 301, bot-beskyttelse) — ikke medregnet
⚡ Performance
85
- LCP 2701ms (denne side, rigtige brugere) — for langsom; Googles grænse er 2500ms — på vej ned fra 1717ms over 25 uger, så det virker
📱 Mobile Adaptation
85
- 19 fixed pixel widths found — use responsive units (%, rem)
🔗 Internal Links
100
No issues found ✓
⭐ E-E-A-T Content Quality
62
- Moderate E-E-A-T — room for improvement in several categories
🎯 Platform Optimization
80
- Ingen FAQ-/spørgsmålssektion fundet på forsiden — de citerede sider besvarer typisk kundernes spørgsmål direkte i teksten
- Only 1/2 community validation signals found — recommend Trustpilot, G2, case studies or LinkedIn
🗂️ Schema Recommendations
65
- Missing WebSite schema — helps AI identify the website's role
- Missing FAQPage schema — FAQs are frequently cited in AI answers
- Missing BreadcrumbList schema — structures the page path for AI
🔢 Empirical Content Data
55
- Lav empirisk tæthed: kun 0 af 103 sætninger indeholder konkrete tal, procenter eller kvantificerede resultater. At tilføje statistikker var blandt de mest effektive ændringer i KDD'24-studiet (30-40 % på studiets primære synlighedsmål)
- Intet konkret case-resultat fundet (fx 'sagsbehandlingstid fra 3 uger til 4 dage'). Kundehistorier med målbare resultater er stærkt citerbart indhold — brug kun tal, I selv har målt, og skriv gerne hvornår
- Ingen ekstern kildehenvisning fundet. Citater fra analysefirmaer eller branchestudier øger AI's tillid markant
- Lav teknisk forklaringsdybde (1 sætning forklarer mekanismen bag jeres løsning). AI prioriterer indhold der forklarer HVORDAN frem for HVAD ('vi bruger RAG + vektor-søgning til ...')
How does your website score?
Same engine, same 15 dimensions — run Geoa’s free GEO-test on your own domain and get a report like this in under a minute.
Run the free AI Visibility Checker →