SEO vs GEO: A Checklist for Evaluating Your Current Programme

Most marketing teams are running an SEO programme. Fewer are running a GEO programme. Almost none have audited how well their existing work translates from one discipline to the other.

This checklist is designed to help you assess where your current programme stands across both dimensions - and identify the most valuable gaps to address. Work through each criterion for your existing content strategy and measurement setup.

SEO Foundations: Are These In Place?

Before layering GEO on top, it is worth confirming the SEO foundations are solid. GEO amplifies what is already there - it does not compensate for fundamentals that are missing.

1. Keyword research that maps to buyer intent

What to check: Does your keyword strategy cover informational queries (research-mode), comparison queries (evaluation-mode), and transactional queries (purchase-mode) in addition to branded terms?

What good looks like: A content plan where each piece maps to a specific stage of the buyer journey, with keyword targets chosen for intent, not just volume.

Red flag: A content library dominated by bottom-funnel product pages, with little content addressing the research-mode questions buyers ask earlier in the journey. This is also likely to be the content gap driving poor GEO performance.

2. Structured data implementation

What to check: Do your key pages implement schema markup - Organisation, Product, FAQ, HowTo, and Article schema as appropriate?

What good looks like: Schema markup on the homepage (Organisation), product pages (Product), FAQ pages (FAQPage), and blog content (Article). This helps both Google's rich results and AI systems' ability to parse your content.

Red flag: A modern site with zero schema markup. This is surprisingly common and leaves significant structured data signal on the table for both SEO and GEO.

3. Technical SEO health

What to check: Is your site crawlable, fast, and free from significant technical errors? Does it perform well on Core Web Vitals?

Why it matters for GEO too: AI systems with real-time retrieval (like Perplexity) discover and retrieve content from the web. A crawlable, performant site is a prerequisite for that retrieval to work correctly.

GEO Foundations: These Are Often Missing

The GEO gaps are typically more significant than the SEO gaps for most B2B brands. Work through each:

4. AI visibility baseline measurement

What to check: Have you systematically tested your brand's visibility across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, and Gemini for your most important category queries?

What good looks like: A documented baseline showing your citation rate across 20-50 queries on each of the four major AI models, taken within the last 60 days.

Red flag: No systematic measurement, or only informal "I tried a few prompts in ChatGPT" spot-checks. Without a baseline, you cannot measure progress or identify the highest-value gaps.

See AI Visibility: How It Works for how to set up systematic measurement.

5. Content structured for AI retrieval

What to check: Does your site include FAQ pages that directly answer the questions buyers ask AI systems? Do you have comparison content that addresses "[your brand] vs [competitor]" queries? Do you have explicit use-case pages that describe who your product is for and what problems it solves?

What good looks like: Dedicated FAQ pages per product area, explicit comparison pages for your top three to five competitors, and use-case pages that use direct, clear language about what problem you solve and for whom.

Red flag: A site that is primarily marketing-speak and product feature descriptions, with no content that directly addresses the research-mode questions AI systems receive about your category.

6. Positioning clarity for AI systems

What to check: Does your content clearly and consistently communicate what category you are in, what problem you solve, and who your target customer is? Is this consistent across your homepage, product pages, and third-party profiles?

What good looks like: An AI system should be able to correctly characterise your brand - category, use case, target customer - from reading your site content. Test this by asking an AI "what is [your brand]?" and comparing the answer to how you would describe yourself.

Red flag: Vague or jargon-heavy positioning that an AI system would struggle to translate into a clear, accurate characterisation. If AI answers about your brand feel generic or slightly off-category, this is the problem.

7. Third-party reference network

What to check: Is your brand discussed in relevant third-party sources - G2, Capterra, Reddit communities in your category, industry publications, analyst comparisons?

What good looks like: Multiple high-quality reviews on G2 and similar platforms, active discussion of your brand in relevant Reddit and forum communities, editorial mentions in industry publications, and at least one analyst or comparison site reference.

Red flag: Minimal third-party presence. AI systems learn about your brand primarily from the web of content about you. If that web is thin, AI systems have limited signal to work from, and your citation rates will reflect that.

8. GEO-specific tracking cadence

What to check: Are you running AI visibility checks on a regular schedule - at minimum monthly, ideally weekly for active programmes?

What good looks like: A defined query set, tracked consistently across all major AI models, with historical data archived to show trends.

Red flag: Irregular or ad hoc checking with no historical record. AI visibility changes over time. Without consistent tracking, you cannot detect regressions or measure the impact of improvements.

9. Content feedback loop from GEO data

What to check: When you identify a GEO gap - a query where a competitor is cited and you are not - does this translate into a content action item?

What good looks like: A clear process where citation gaps feed directly into the content calendar, with someone responsible for creating the content that addresses each gap.

Red flag: GEO data that sits in a dashboard and does not affect content decisions. Data without a response protocol produces reports, not results.

Scoring Your Programme

SEO foundations (criteria 1-3): If any are red-flag status, address them before heavily investing in GEO. You are leaving foundational value uncaptured.

GEO foundations (criteria 4-9): Count how many are "red flag":

• 0-1 red flags: Strong programme. Focus on optimisation and competitive benchmarking.
• 2-3 red flags: Moderate gaps. Prioritise baseline measurement and structured content.
• 4+ red flags: Significant gaps. Start with baseline measurement and positioning clarity before adding tracking complexity.

The most common pattern: excellent on SEO foundations (criteria 1-3), red flags on GEO criteria 4, 5, and 8 - no systematic measurement, no AI-structured content, no regular tracking cadence. These are the three highest-impact items to address first.

See where your brand appears in AI answers - try Bingly free