GEO report · public sharing
ikea.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
77.5
/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
92/100
Grade A
Your AI visibility
66/100
Grade D
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
50
- Missing WebSite schema — helps AI identify the website's role
📝 Basic Page Signals
100
No issues found ✓
💬 Content Citability
55
- BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) missing — the key point should appear in the first 60 words
- Only 0/7 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
100
No issues found ✓
📱 Mobile Adaptation
85
- 32 fixed pixel widths found — use responsive units (%, rem)
🔗 Internal Links
100
No issues found ✓
⭐ E-E-A-T Content Quality
38
- Weak E-E-A-T profile — AI search engines rate trustworthiness as low
🎯 Platform Optimization
75
- Few question-answer patterns — AI often cites direct answers
- Only 0/2 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
65
- Lav empirisk tæthed: kun 1 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
- Lav teknisk forklaringsdybde (0 sætninger 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 →