---
title: "The best GEO agencies in the US, ranked by how often AI actually recommends them"
url: "/blog/best-geo-agencies"
canonical_url: "https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/best-geo-agencies"
markdown_url: "https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/best-geo-agencies.md"
language: "en"
last_updated: "2026-09-23"
type: "blog"
summary: "We asked ChatGPT and Claude six buyer questions 198 times over six days and counted which US GEO agencies they named. No submissions, no fees."
site: "CrunchJunkie"
llms_txt: "https://crunchjunkie.io/llms.txt"
---

# The best GEO agencies in the US, ranked by how often AI actually recommends them
Source: https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/best-geo-agencies
Published: 2026-09-08 · Updated: 2026-09-23 · By Philipp Enders · AI visibility · 14 min read

Ask ChatGPT for the best GEO agency in America and it tells you, before it names anyone, that there is no objective number one, that the field is young, and that many “best agency” lists are published by the agencies on them. Ask Claude the same about AEO and it opens with the same caveat. Both are right — so instead of writing another list, we measured one. Over six days we asked the two engines six questions a real B2B buyer would ask, 198 times, and counted who they named.

## Update, 23 September: we measured it again
Since this went out we ran the identical measurement again over 14 to 23 September, days this study does not cover, and compared the two. Across the nineteen agencies not one changed by an amount the samples can tell apart from chance. Eight of them changed rank anyway, and Siege Media edged past iPullRank into first place on a margin of two answers.

So the table below still stands, and the groups in it — who is near the top, who is near the bottom — held across both windows. The exact order inside the top five carries less meaning than its position implies, and we would not report a one-place move as a result. The full side-by-side, with 95% ranges for both windows and the sample sizes a real change would need, is in [how much AI-visibility movement is just noise](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/ai-visibility-noise-vs-signal).

## The shortlist by what you are actually asking
The overall ranking rewards agencies the engines name on the generic questions. Most buyers do not ask generic questions. If you already know your situation, start here: the top three agencies on each buyer question, with how many of that question's runs named them.

Only iPullRank and Siege Media appear in both a segment top three and the overall top five. Nine of the eighteen agencies on this page are named almost exclusively on one segment question and nowhere else, which is the single most useful thing here if you are hiring.

| If you are asking about… | 1st | 2nd | 3rd |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| B2B SaaS | Directive (21 of 34) | Obility (15 of 34) | Omniscient Digital (13 of 34) |
| Reddit and community | Obility (27 of 32) | Foundation Marketing (18 of 32) | [OutreachBloom](https://outreachbloom.com/) (14 of 32) |
| A limited budget | Digital Elevator (11 of 34) | Yes Optimist (7 of 34) | WebFX, Citant.ai (6 of 34 each) |
| AEO / getting cited | iPullRank (24 of 34) | NoGood (17 of 34) | Seer Interactive (15 of 34) |
| “Best GEO agency” | Siege Media (31 of 32) | Go Fish Digital (29 of 32) | iPullRank (26 of 32) |
| “Best AI SEO agency” | iPullRank (30 of 32) | Siege Media (24 of 32) | Omniscient Digital (18 of 32) |

Top three agencies per buyer question, by number of that question's runs in which the engines named them.

## The overall ranking
Recommended in = the share of all 198 discovery runs in which an engine named the agency. Best engine = the one that named it more often; “Both” means the two were within one mention of each other. Seer Interactive and WebFX tied on 35 mentions each; Seer ranks higher because the engines place it earlier in the answer, average position 1.0 against 5.5.

Digital Elevator was added to tracking on 4 September, so it has been measured over 144 runs rather than 198. Its 6.6% is calculated on the full 198 for comparability; on its own sample it is 9%.

![CrunchJunkie KPI cards for OutreachBloom across the six discovery prompts: 7.1% visibility plus or minus 1.8% on 14 of 198 runs, average position 1.5, sentiment 63 out of 100, share of voice 2.4%](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/img/geo-agency-discovery-kpis.webp)

| # | Agency | Recommended in | Best engine | Where the engines recommend them |
| ---: | --- | ---: | --- | --- |
| 1 | iPullRank | 42.9% | ChatGPT | Enterprise, AEO, technical GEO |
| 2 | Siege Media | 38.4% | ChatGPT | Content-led GEO; named on every prompt but Reddit |
| 3 | Omniscient Digital | 29.3% | Claude | B2B SaaS; GEO inside SEO and editorial |
| 4 | Directive | 25.8% | Both | B2B SaaS; most-cited source on that prompt |
| 5 | Obility | 23.2% | Claude | Reddit and GEO tied to pipeline; B2B SaaS |
| 6 | Go Fish Digital | 22.2% | ChatGPT | 29 of 32 “best GEO agency” answers, little else |
| 7 | NoGood | 19.2% | ChatGPT | Growth teams, AEO |
| 8 | First Page Sage | 18.2% | Claude | Thought leadership, AI companies |
| 9 | Seer Interactive | 17.7% | ChatGPT | Measurement-heavy enterprise programs, AEO |
| 10 | WebFX | 17.7% | Both | Traditional SEO agencies adding AI search |
| 11 | Foundation Marketing | 13.6% | ChatGPT | Reddit-led GEO, enterprise SaaS |
| 12 | Yes Optimist | 8.6% | Claude | Startups, limited budget |
| 13 | OutreachBloom | 7.1% | Claude | Reddit and community route to AI citations |
| 14 | Digital Elevator | 6.6% | Both | Limited budget |
| 15 | Bay Leaf Digital | 4.5% | Claude | B2B SaaS |
| 16 | Citant.ai | 3.0% | ChatGPT | Scoped GEO pilots for SaaS startups |
| 17 | NP Digital | 1.5% | ChatGPT | Large brands |
| 18 | Grow and Convert | 1.0% | ChatGPT | B2B SaaS |

US GEO agencies ranked by the share of 198 AI discovery runs in which ChatGPT or Claude named them, 3–8 September 2026.

## How we measured this
We asked six questions, written the way a buyer types them, covering the three labels people use for the same discipline (AI SEO, GEO, AEO) and three buyer situations (B2B SaaS, a limited budget, Reddit and community):

1. What are the best AI SEO agencies in America?
2. What are the best GEO agencies in America?
3. Which US agencies specialise in generative engine optimization for B2B SaaS companies?
4. Best answer engine optimization (AEO) agencies for getting cited in ChatGPT and Perplexity?
5. Which GEO agencies are a good fit for a startup or small B2B company on a limited budget?
6. Which agencies can improve a B2B brand's visibility in AI search through Reddit and community marketing?

We asked ChatGPT (gpt-4o-search-preview) and Claude (Sonnet 4.6, both with search), the two assistants that reliably return named shortlists with sources. Gemini rarely names agencies on these questions and Google AI Overviews trigger inconsistently, so we left both out rather than report thin numbers.

Each prompt ran on each engine at least twice a day from 3 to 8 September, and four times on 7 September: 198 runs across the six questions. The prompts did not all go live at the same hour on the first day, so run counts vary from 32 to 34 by prompt. Every percentage on this page is an agency's mentions divided by all 198 runs; every “x of y” figure inside an entry is divided by that prompt's own run count, which is always stated. Answers vary run to run, which is exactly why a single query tells you nothing.

What counts is a named recommendation in the answer body. A citation to an agency's website without naming it does not count, and being named as an example of what not to do does not count. Ties break on average position, then on sentiment.

What this does not tell you is whether an agency is good. It tells you which agencies the engines have enough public evidence about to recommend, which is a proxy for public track record and nothing more. Small specialists with strong private client work will rank low here. Treat it as a shortlist, not a verdict.

Agencies do not apply and cannot pay. Nineteen are tracked, and they are tracked because the engines named them. A few more were named or cited in only one or two runs and are not tracked yet: Searchbloom, Redd, Discovered Labs, RevenueZen, Karma Alien, Nerativ, Sculpt, 009 Agency, Mainsail, The CEO of GEO, Thrive and LoudFace. Searchbloom is the only one with enough mentions to place — four runs, which would put it seventeenth. We will fold them in at the next refresh.

All of it was measured with [CrunchJunkie](https://crunchjunkie.io/products/ai-visibility), the AI-visibility platform we build. That is a conflict of interest of a sort, so the prompts, the run counts and the window are all above, and the underlying runs are available on request.

![The six discovery prompts tracked in CrunchJunkie with their mention rates, the Reddit and community question at 44% and the other five at 0% for OutreachBloom](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/img/geo-agency-prompt-performance.webp)

## The engines disagree, and the disagreement is the finding
Rank hides a split worth knowing about before you shortlist anyone. Seer Interactive is named in 32 ChatGPT runs and 3 Claude runs. Omniscient Digital is close to the reverse: Claude names it nearly twice as often as ChatGPT. NoGood is a ChatGPT pick almost four times over. Bay Leaf Digital is effectively a Claude-only recommendation.

So “the AI recommends us” is not a claim any agency can make without naming the engine. If your buyers live in ChatGPT, Seer and NoGood are on your shortlist and Bay Leaf is not. If they live in Claude, it is the other way round. The agencies that show up in both — iPullRank, Siege Media, Directive, WebFX — are the ones with public evidence broad enough that two differently-trained systems reach for them independently.

The movement inside six days is also worth reading. Directive climbed the most of anyone, and Omniscient, Obility, Siege and NoGood all moved several points, because the engines re-read the web between runs. That is the argument for measuring continuously rather than once.

![Visibility trend chart for six tracked GEO agencies across 3 to 8 September 2026, showing one line climbing steeply from under 10% to nearly 40%](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/img/geo-agency-visibility-trend.webp)

## How the engines describe them
Rank tells you how often an agency is named. This tells you what the engines say when they name it. The phrase column is the description they keep reaching for; the caveat is the reservation they attach. Sentiment is CrunchJunkie's 0–100 score pooled over the mentions in the window, and a dash means there were not enough scored mentions to compute one — not that sentiment was poor.

| Agency | Sentiment | The phrase the engines keep using | The caveat attached |
| --- | ---: | --- | --- |
| iPullRank | 81 | Relevance engineering, information retrieval, embeddings | Built for enterprise; small companies get quoted a big program |
| Siege Media | 78 | Content-led, digital PR, LLM visibility reporting | A content program first; GEO sits inside it, not separate |
| Omniscient Digital | — | GEO integrated into SEO and editorial | Not a standalone GEO engagement |
| Directive | — | Performance marketing, pipeline reporting | Paid-media mindset; not content- or community-led |
| Obility | — | Reddit tied to pipeline and revenue attribution | Needs a demand-gen budget to integrate with |
| Go Fish Digital | 75 | Prompt mapping, digital PR | Named on the generic question, rarely on a segment |
| NoGood | — | Growth agency, AEO | Not a pure search specialist |
| First Page Sage | 69 | Thought leadership | Founder-led content; not technical GEO |
| Seer Interactive | 100 | Measurement, experimentation, its own research | Enterprise only; Claude almost never names it |
| WebFX | 70 | Full-service SEO with AI search added | Placed late in the answer when the question is GEO |
| Foundation Marketing | 75 | Organic Reddit inside a content and PR program | Full-program budget required |
| OutreachBloom | 63 | Transparent pricing, month-to-month, no lock-ins | Case-study proof is mostly cold email; the AI SEO line looks new |

How ChatGPT and Claude characterise each agency across the window, with the reservation they attach.

## What the engines associate with each agency
The same data seen a different way. Each figure is the share of an agency's own descriptions that reach for a given theme, so agencies with different mention counts stay comparable.

iPullRank's shape is the technical one: relevance engineering in 42% of its descriptions, embeddings and technical SEO in a third each, information retrieval in a quarter. Go Fish Digital is the digital-PR shape, 57%. OutreachBloom's is narrow and sits on digital PR and AI visibility, which is what you would expect of an agency the engines only name on the Reddit question. Siege Media barely registers on these technical themes at all, because the engines describe it in terms of content and PR outcomes rather than techniques — which is not an absence of reputation, it is a different one.

If you are an agency, this is the more actionable chart of the two. Rank tells you whether you are known. This tells you what you are known for, and whether that matches what you sell.

![Radar chart comparing how AI describes OutreachBloom, iPullRank and Siege Media across eight themes including relevance engineering, embeddings, technical SEO and digital PR](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/img/geo-agency-brand-shape.webp)

## What the engines are actually reading
If you want to understand why the list looks like this, look at the sources. Across the 198 runs, nineteen of the twenty most-cited domains are agency websites. The single exception is Google's own developer documentation.

That is the finding, and it cuts both ways. The engines are largely reading agencies writing about agencies, which is why a roundup its own author appears in can move a ranking. But on three of the six questions the most-cited page is an agency's own services page rather than anyone's list — Directive on B2B SaaS, iPullRank on AEO, Obility on Reddit — with a fourth, AI SEO, tied between iPullRank's own pages and a competitor's roundup.

The engines also read the platforms' own documentation before they answer: Google's AI features pages picked up 14 citations on the AI SEO question, OpenAI's help centre 9 on AEO (where ChatGPT quotes OpenAI's own statement that there is no way to guarantee placement in ChatGPT search), and Reddit's business pages 11 on the Reddit question.

The lesson for anyone trying to get recommended is in that middle paragraph: publish the thing the engines want to cite. A services page that answers the question beats a listicle that mentions you.

| Question | Most-cited page | Citations (runs) | What it is |
| --- | --- | ---: | --- |
| Best AI SEO | ipullrank.com, searchbloom.com | 15 each (32) | iPullRank's own pages; Searchbloom's roundup |
| Best GEO | gofishdigital.com | 26 (32) | Their own GEO agencies roundup |
| B2B SaaS | directiveconsulting.com | 28 (34) | GEO services page |
| AEO | ipullrank.com | 20 (34) | AI Search Manual and services pages |
| Limited budget | thedigitalelevator.com | 18 (34) | Their own roundup and pricing guide |
| Reddit and community | obilityb2b.com | 43 (32) | Reddit services page |

The most-cited page per question, with its citation count and that question's run count. A count can exceed the run count because one answer may cite a page more than once.

## The same question, three different shortlists
“Best AI SEO agency”, “best GEO agency” and “best AEO agency” mean the same thing to a buyer. They do not to the engines.

Ask for AI SEO and you get iPullRank (30 of 32), Siege Media (24), Omniscient Digital (18), WebFX (14), then First Page Sage and Seer Interactive on 10 each.

Ask for GEO and Siege Media appears in 31 of 32 answers, Go Fish Digital in 29, iPullRank in 26, Directive in 19 — and Seer drops to 9.

Ask for AEO and iPullRank is named in 24 of 34 runs, NoGood second on 17, Seer third on 15, Siege fourth on 12, and nobody else above 9.

Ask about your segment and the list changes again: Directive, Obility and Omniscient for SaaS; Obility, Foundation and OutreachBloom for Reddit; Digital Elevator, Yes Optimist and Citant.ai for a limited budget.

If you are a buyer, ask the engines your own question rather than the generic one. If you are an agency, the space between those three lists is where the opening is.

![Biggest movers panel showing Directive up 20.8 points, Omniscient Digital up 15.9, Obility up 11.5, Siege Media up 10.4, NoGood up 9.3 and iPullRank up 5.6 points](https://crunchjunkie.io/blog/img/geo-agency-biggest-movers.webp)

## What to ask before you hire
The engines are consistent about what they value when they hedge on an agency, so these questions are theirs as much as ours. On the AEO question ChatGPT says outright that no agency can reliably guarantee a ChatGPT or Perplexity citation, cites OpenAI's own help page to prove it, and says a credible partner sells a measurable program instead. On the budget question it puts a credible engagement at around 2,000 to 3,000 dollars a month, and says that below that you should buy a focused audit rather than a vague retainer.

1. Which prompts will you measure, and how often? If the answer is “keywords”, they are selling SEO with a new label.
2. What does the share-of-voice report look like, and against whom? Ask to see a real one with the client name redacted.
3. Do you guarantee citations or placements? The right answer is no.
4. Can we start with a scoped pilot? ChatGPT recommends a 90-day pilot for any agency it cannot verify from public proof, which on this list is most of them.
5. Which of your own pages do the engines cite? An agency that cannot answer is not measuring itself.
6. What is the case study for a company like ours? Not a logo wall — a before-and-after on named prompts. The engines reward the agencies that publish one.

If you want to run this measurement on your own brand rather than take our word for it, that is what [AI visibility tracking](https://crunchjunkie.io/products/ai-visibility) does, and there is a [free AI visibility check](https://crunchjunkie.io/products/geo-audit) if you just want to see where you stand.

### FAQ
**What is GEO?**
Generative engine optimization: getting a brand named and cited in answers from ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Google's AI features. AEO (answer engine optimization) and AI SEO are the same discipline under different labels — though as the shortlists on this page show, the engines respond differently depending on which label you use.

**How was this ranking built?**
Six buyer questions were asked of ChatGPT and Claude at least twice a day from 3 to 8 September 2026, producing 198 runs. An agency's rank is the share of those 198 runs in which an engine named it in the answer body. A citation without a naming does not count. Ties break on average position in the answer.

**Can an agency pay to be included?**
No. There is no submission form and no fee. Agencies are tracked because the engines named them.

**Why are Gemini and Google AI Overviews not included?**
Gemini rarely names agencies on these questions, and Google AI Overviews trigger inconsistently on them. Neither produced enough named recommendations to rank on. If that changes, we will add them.

**Does a high rank mean an agency is good?**
No. It means the engines have enough public evidence about that agency to recommend it, which is a proxy for public track record and nothing more. A small specialist with excellent private client work will rank low here. Use it as a shortlist, then do reference calls.

**How often is this updated?**
Quarterly, with a changelog on the page. Agencies whose position moves meaningfully will be told.

### Methodology & data
Six buyer questions, asked of ChatGPT (gpt-4o-search-preview) and Claude (Sonnet 4.6, with search), at least twice a day from 3 to 8 September 2026: 198 discovery runs in total, 32 to 34 per question because the prompts went live at different hours on the first day. Rank is the share of all 198 runs in which an engine named the agency in the answer body; a citation without a naming does not count, and being named as an example of what not to do does not count. Ties break on average position in the answer. Percentages for every agency use the same 198-run denominator, except Digital Elevator, which was added on 4 September and is noted where it appears. Gemini and Google AI Overviews were excluded: neither returns named shortlists on these questions often enough to rank on. Sentiment is CrunchJunkie's 0–100 score pooled across the mentions in the window, and is only shown where there were enough scored mentions to compute it. Measured with CrunchJunkie, which we build; the prompts, run counts and window are all stated so the numbers can be checked, and the underlying runs are available on request.

### Sources
- [OpenAI Help Centre — ChatGPT search](https://help.openai.com/)
- [Google Search Central — AI features and your website](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/ai-features)
- [Reddit for Business](https://business.reddit.com/)