Benchmarks · Consumer & e-commerce

DTC brands: AI readiness benchmark

33 brands scanned on July 29, 2026. The average score is 72 out of 100. Homepages only, from a hand-picked list.

33sites scanned
72average score
46–87score range
Jul 29, 2026scan date

Key findings

  1. 1

    The average score in the DTC brands category is 72/100, 1 point below the all-category average of 73.

  2. 2

    Of the three pillars, Technical foundation is the strongest in the DTC brands category at 17/20 (85% of the maximum), and Discoverability is the weakest at 27/40 (68%).

  3. 3

    In the DTC brands category, Content schema (Article, FAQ…) is the most-failed check: 91% of sites did not earn full points on it.

Where the scores fall

The lowest score is 46, the highest is 87 and the average is 72, out of 100.

Fig. 1

Score range for DTC brands DTC brands sites range from 46 to 87 out of 100, averaging 72, across 33 sites. DTC brands · 33 brands 72 46 87 0 25 50 75 100 AI visibility score (0–100)
The bar spans the lowest to the highest score in the category. The marker is the average.

Source: Citehound scan, July 29, 2026, 33 brands

The three pillars

Each score is built from three pillars worth 40, 20 and 40 points. These are the category averages.

Fig. 2

Pillar averages against their maximums Average score per pillar for DTC brands. Discoverability, maximum 40 points: 27. Technical foundation, maximum 20 points: 17. Content & trust, maximum 40 points: 28. Discoverability · max 40 27/40 Technical foundation · max 20 17/20 Content & trust · max 40 28/40 Filled = points earned. Unfilled = gap to maximum.
Filled is the average points earned; the track is the maximum for that pillar.

Source: Citehound scan, July 29, 2026, 33 brands

The checks sites miss most

Share of sites that did not earn full points, for the 8 most-failed checks.

Fig. 3

The 8 most-failed checks for DTC brands Share of sites that did not earn full points, most-failed first. Content schema (Article, FAQ…): 91%; Single H1 heading: 52%; Meta description: 27%; Author / about signals: 27%; llms.txt present: 24%; Structured data (JSON-LD): 24%; Organization / WebSite schema: 24%; Page title: 15%. Content schema (Article, FAQ…) 91% Single H1 heading 52% Meta description 27% Author / about signals 27% llms.txt present 24% Structured data (JSON-LD) 24% Organization / WebSite schema 24% Page title 15%
Ranked from most to least failed. A site fails a check by earning less than its full points, which includes partial credit. AI crawler access is shown by crawler in the next figure instead. Checks tied at 15% are listed in scan order, so a tied check may fall just outside the eight.

Source: Citehound scan, July 29, 2026, 33 brands

Which AI crawlers can get in

Counts of sites, for each of 10 AI crawlers, where it is open, limited or blocked.

Fig. 4

Access by AI crawler across 33 sites Number of DTC brands sites where each crawler is open, limited or blocked. GPTBot: 3 open, 29 limited, 1 blocked; ChatGPT-User: 3 open, 30 limited, 0 blocked; OAI-SearchBot: 3 open, 30 limited, 0 blocked; ClaudeBot: 3 open, 30 limited, 0 blocked; anthropic-ai: 2 open, 31 limited, 0 blocked; PerplexityBot: 3 open, 30 limited, 0 blocked; Perplexity-User: 2 open, 31 limited, 0 blocked; Google-Extended: 2 open, 30 limited, 1 blocked; CCBot: 1 open, 31 limited, 1 blocked; Bytespider: 1 open, 32 limited, 0 blocked. GPTBot 29 1 blocked ChatGPT-User 30 0 blocked OAI-SearchBot 30 0 blocked ClaudeBot 30 0 blocked anthropic-ai 31 0 blocked PerplexityBot 30 0 blocked Perplexity-User 31 0 blocked Google-Extended 30 1 blocked CCBot 31 1 blocked Bytespider 32 0 blocked Open Limited Blocked
Open: no rule keeps the crawler out. Limited: at least one Disallow rule applies to the crawler, mostly an ordinary path such as /wp-admin/, and the rest of the site is open to it. Limited is not a block, although the scan gives it half credit. Blocked: the whole site is disallowed.

Source: Citehound scan, July 29, 2026, 33 brands

Method and limits

What we scanned

33 brands in this category completed a scan on July 29, 2026. 14 more on the list could not be reached or timed out. They are excluded from every figure on this page.

What we pulled

For each site: robots.txt, sitemap.xml, llms.txt and the homepage, retrieved live. Homepages only. Inner pages were not scanned, and each site was scanned once.

What we scored

One score out of 100 per site, split across three pillars: discoverability (40), technical foundation (20), content & trust (40). The checks and their point values are on the methodology page.

How the sites were chosen

The lists are hand-picked, well-known sites in the category. They are not a random sample, so these figures describe the sites we scanned, not the category as a whole.

Repeat scans

In one October 2026 rescan of the same lists, category averages moved by one point or less. Individual sites moved more: about a third changed by 3 to 15 points.

What this measures

Whether AI systems can reach a site, and whether its homepage carries the signals machines read. It does not measure whether any assistant names a brand in an answer. Model responses vary by prompt, session and training data, and no scan of public files can predict them.

What this doesn’t tell you

  • Anything about pages other than the homepage.
  • Why the unreachable sites could not be scanned, or how they would have scored.
  • Whether any of these signals relates to being named in an AI answer. This page measures inputs, not outcomes.

How to cite this

Citehound, “AI readiness benchmark: DTC brands,” July 29, 2026. https://getcitehound.com/benchmarks/dtc-brands

Canonical URL: https://getcitehound.com/benchmarks/dtc-brands

To see where your own site lands against these numbers, run the free scan. All benchmarks.

Scan your site free