ChatGPT Visibility Grader

When ChatGPT answers a question with browsing or search, it reads pages, pulls a clear answer, and attributes it to a source it can identify. This grader scores how ready your page is for that — a deterministic, page-level read we call ChatGPT readiness. It measures the signals ChatGPT tends to reward, and it never claims confirmed visibility.

ChatGPT does best with pages where the answer is in plain server-rendered text, the brand or author is clearly identified, and the content is structured as questions with direct answers. We check exactly those signals and return the highest-impact fixes first, alongside readiness lenses for Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, and Gemini.

The signals ChatGPT rewards are the same across pages, but where they break depends on your page type. On a product or pricing page, state the actual price in server-rendered text rather than inside a script-loaded widget, name the product and company with Organization or Product schema so ChatGPT can attribute the answer to you, and add a short 'What does X cost?' heading with a one-sentence answer that matches the exact shape of a buyer prompt.

On a comparison or 'X vs Y' page, give a plain-text verdict in the first two sentences (a recommendation trapped in a chart image is invisible to the model), use specific checkable differences like price, limits, and supported platforms rather than vague 'more flexible' claims, and keep both product names in headings and body text so the page is retrievable for either brand's prompt. On a how-to or guide page, structure each step as a question or imperative with the answer directly underneath, surface the key requirement or number early, and confirm the steps are in the HTML rather than rendered only client-side. On a local or service page, declare the business with LocalBusiness schema, put the answer to 'who does X in [city]' in readable text, and avoid hiding hours, location, or service details behind a map widget or tabbed JavaScript.

As a worked example, take a SaaS pricing page whose headline reads 'Flexible plans for growing teams' and loads its price table through JavaScript after the page renders. When ChatGPT reads the raw HTML it sees the marketing headline and almost none of the pricing text, has no Organization or Product schema to attribute an answer to the brand, and finds nothing phrased as the question a buyer would type, which is some version of 'how much does [product] cost?'. The grader flags three things in impact order: low rendered word count, a missing entity identity, and no question-and-answer structure. The fix is to render the price in plain text, add Product plus Organization schema with the brand name, and lead with a 'What does [product] cost?' heading answered in one sentence. That turns a page ChatGPT can barely read into one it can read, attribute, and quote.

There is no public score that guarantees a ChatGPT citation, and we never present one. A page in good shape has its core answer and key facts in server-rendered HTML, carries a clear entity identity (one H1, a declared page language, and Organization, Product, or LocalBusiness schema that names the source), phrases its important sections as real questions with a direct one-to-three-sentence answer underneath, and states specific verifiable facts such as a price, a percentage, a count, or a date instead of adjectives. Pages that miss on readiness usually share one root cause: the substance a model would quote is either not in the HTML, not attributed to a named source, or not written as an answer to a question. The grader tells you which is true for your page and orders the fixes so you start with the one that moves readiness the most. Readiness is not the same as a confirmed citation, which depends on the engine, the prompt, and your wider authority.