GEO report · public sharing
handelsbanken.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: 2026-10-02 · Back to the benchmark
72.0
/100
Grade: C
A solid foundation, but there are several areas that could be improved to increase the likelihood of AI citations. Dimensions marked ‘not measured’ are treated as neutral, typically because the site blocks automatic measurements.
A solid foundation, but there are several areas that could be improved to increase the likelihood of AI citations. Dimensions marked ‘not measured’ are treated as neutral, typically because the site blocks automatic measurements.
Your Google visibility
81/100
Grade B
Your AI visibility
70/100
Grade C
The 15 dimensions
🤖 AI Crawler Accessibility
100
No issues found ✓
🖥️ Server-Side Rendering
100
- Content appears in HTML — SSR friendly ✓
📄 llms.txt
0
- No /llms.txt found — strongly recommended for AI visibility. Call POST /llms-txt/generate/{customer_id} to generate one automatically.
- 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
0
- No JSON-LD structured data found
📝 Basic Page Signals
85
- Manglende Open Graph / Social Sharing tags — AI-crawlere (Perplexity, ChatGPT plugins) bruger og:title og og:description til entitetsgenkendelse og uddrag. Mangler: Mangler og:title meta-tag, Mangler og:description meta-tag, Mangler og:image meta-tag, Mangler twitter:card/twitter:title meta-tags
💬 Content Citability
85
- Only 1/11 headings are questions (9%) — recommend 10%+
🏷️ Brand Entity
100
No issues found ✓
🔒 Security
100
- Security-headers kunne ikke måles (HTTP 301, bot-beskyttelse) — ikke medregnet
⚡ Performance
73
- CLS 0.87 (denne side, rigtige brugere) — for høj; Googles grænse er 0.1 — og STIGENDE fra 0.02 over 25 uger
📱 Mobile Adaptation
100
No issues found ✓
🔗 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
65
- Ingen FAQ-/spørgsmålssektion fundet på forsiden — de citerede sider besvarer typisk kundernes spørgsmål direkte i teksten
- Few question-answer patterns — AI often cites direct answers
- Only 1/2 community validation signals found — recommend Trustpilot, G2, case studies or LinkedIn
🗂️ Schema Recommendations
30
- Missing Organization/LocalBusiness schema — most important for AI entity recognition
- 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 27 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 →