Why We Publish Our Evaluation Methodology
MarGen publishes comparative guides to GEO and AEO agencies. Those guides influence buying decisions, and that influence carries responsibility. We believe any organisation that compares and recommends agencies should be transparent about how it reaches its conclusions.
This page explains exactly how we evaluate GEO agencies — the criteria, the weighting, the scoring rubric, and the sources we use. If you disagree with our methodology, we welcome the conversation. If you are an agency that believes your score does not reflect your capabilities, we invite you to submit evidence and we will reassess.
Transparency builds trust. In a market full of opaque rankings and pay-to-play “best of” lists, we take a different approach.
The Evaluation Framework: Seven Pillars
MarGen’s GEO agency evaluation is built on seven pillars, each weighted according to its importance for UK regulated sector businesses — our primary audience.
| Pillar | Weight | What It Measures |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Methodology Depth | 20% | Rigour and sophistication of the agency’s GEO approach |
| 2. Regulated Sector Expertise | 20% | Experience with FCA, SRA, CQC, and other UK regulators |
| 3. Metrics and Measurement | 15% | Quality and transparency of performance reporting |
| 4. Platform Breadth | 15% | Coverage across AI platforms (not just Google) |
| 5. Case Studies and Evidence | 15% | Verifiable results from real client engagements |
| 6. Team and Capability | 10% | Depth of specialist GEO talent |
| 7. Transparency and Ethics | 5% | Pricing clarity, contract fairness, honest marketing |
Total: 100%. Each pillar is scored 1-10, then weighted to produce a final score out of 10.
Pillar 1: Methodology Depth (20%)
This is the most important differentiator between genuine GEO agencies and those that have rebranded existing services.
What We Look For
Entity-first approach. Does the agency build its strategy around entity architecture — structured data, knowledge graph signals, individual and brand entity development? Or is it keyword-focused with a GEO label?
Prompt cluster methodology. Does the agency conduct systematic prompt cluster research, or does it rely on traditional keyword tools adapted for AI queries?
Content architecture. Does the agency design content systems (pillar pages, supporting content, internal linking) specifically for AI comprehension, or does it produce standalone articles?
Technical GEO capability. Schema markup, llms.txt implementation, AI crawler management, structured data validation — does the agency have genuine technical depth?
Scoring Rubric
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 9-10 | Proprietary methodology with documented process, entity-first approach, technical depth, and continuous innovation |
| 7-8 | Strong methodology with clear GEO-specific processes, good technical capability |
| 5-6 | Adequate methodology but heavily derived from SEO — limited GEO-specific innovation |
| 3-4 | Generic digital marketing methodology with GEO terminology applied |
| 1-2 | No discernible GEO-specific methodology |
Pillar 2: Regulated Sector Expertise (20%)
For MarGen’s audience, this pillar carries equal weight to methodology. GEO for regulated businesses is fundamentally different from GEO for e-commerce or consumer brands.
What We Look For
Named regulatory knowledge. Can the agency reference specific regulations — FCA PRIN 2A, COBS 4, SRA Transparency Rules, CQC Fundamental Standards — and explain how they affect GEO strategy?
Compliance workflows. Does the agency have documented content approval processes that accommodate regulatory review?
Hallucination management. Does the agency actively monitor for and respond to non-compliant AI citations?
Regulated sector client history. Has the agency worked with FCA-authorised firms, SRA-regulated practices, CQC-registered providers, or equivalent?
Scoring Rubric
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 9-10 | Deep regulated sector experience across multiple regulators, documented compliance processes, named regulatory knowledge |
| 7-8 | Meaningful regulated sector experience with at least one regulator, compliance-aware workflows |
| 5-6 | Some regulated sector clients but limited compliance-specific processes |
| 3-4 | Claims regulated sector capability but limited evidence |
| 1-2 | No regulated sector experience or awareness |
Pillar 3: Metrics and Measurement (15%)
A GEO agency that cannot measure its impact is guessing. The quality of an agency’s measurement framework reveals the depth of its understanding.
What We Look For
Citation-specific metrics. Does the agency track citation frequency, accuracy, sentiment, and platform coverage — or does it rely on proxy metrics like organic traffic?
Commercial attribution. Can the agency connect AI citations to website traffic, leads, and revenue?
Reporting transparency. Are reports clear, regular, and accessible to both marketing and leadership audiences?
Benchmarking. Does the agency benchmark performance against competitors and industry standards?
Scoring Rubric
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 9-10 | Comprehensive citation metrics with commercial attribution, real-time dashboards, competitor benchmarking, board-ready reporting |
| 7-8 | Strong citation metrics with good reporting, some commercial attribution |
| 5-6 | Basic citation tracking with monthly reporting, limited attribution |
| 3-4 | Metrics focused on traditional SEO proxies with GEO terminology |
| 1-2 | Minimal or no GEO-specific measurement capability |
Pillar 4: Platform Breadth (15%)
AI visibility is not a single-platform challenge. An agency that only optimises for Google AI Overviews is addressing perhaps 40% of the AI search landscape.
What We Look For
| Platform | Weight in Assessment | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Google AI Overviews | High | Largest UK search market share |
| ChatGPT | High | Fastest-growing AI platform in UK |
| Perplexity | Medium | Transparent citation model, growing B2B usage |
| Claude | Medium | Strong in professional and regulated contexts |
| Gemini | Medium | Google ecosystem integration |
| Microsoft Copilot | Low-Medium | Enterprise relevance growing |
An agency scoring 9-10 on platform breadth tracks and optimises for all six. A score of 5-6 indicates coverage of two to three platforms.
Pillar 5: Case Studies and Evidence (15%)
Claims without evidence are marketing. We weight verifiable results heavily.
What We Look For
Named or detailed anonymous case studies. We prefer named clients but accept detailed anonymised studies if the metrics are specific and the methodology is clear.
Before/after data. Citation frequency before engagement versus after. Platform coverage improvement. Commercial impact (traffic, leads, revenue) where available.
Time-specific results. “Improved AI visibility” is not a case study. “Increased citation frequency from 4.2 to 18.7 per 100 target queries over 120 days across ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews” is.
Regulated sector case studies. For our evaluations, case studies from regulated businesses carry additional weight.
Scoring Rubric
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 9-10 | Multiple detailed case studies with specific metrics, named clients or richly detailed anonymised studies, regulated sector representation |
| 7-8 | Good case studies with clear metrics, at least some regulated sector examples |
| 5-6 | General case studies with limited metrics specificity |
| 3-4 | Testimonials rather than case studies, no specific metrics |
| 1-2 | No verifiable case studies or evidence of results |
Pillar 6: Team and Capability (10%)
GEO requires a specific mix of skills — technical SEO, content strategy, entity architecture, data analysis, and (for regulated sectors) compliance awareness. We assess whether the agency has the depth of talent to deliver.
What We Look For
- Named GEO specialists (not just “digital marketing executives”)
- Technical capability (developers, schema specialists)
- Content expertise (writers with sector knowledge)
- Analytical capability (data analysts, not just account managers)
- Senior strategic leadership with demonstrable GEO experience
Pillar 7: Transparency and Ethics (5%)
A small but important pillar. Agencies that are transparent about pricing, honest about timelines, and fair in their contracts deserve recognition.
What We Look For
- Published pricing or clear pricing guidance
- Honest marketing (no guaranteed rankings, no “first page in 30 days”)
- Fair contract terms (reasonable notice periods, content ownership)
- Clear disclosure of limitations and what the agency does not do
How We Gather Information
Our evaluations draw from multiple sources:
| Source | How We Use It |
|---|---|
| Agency website and published materials | Methodology claims, case studies, team profiles |
| Direct agency briefings | Agencies can request an evaluation session |
| Client references | Where provided, we contact references with standardised questions |
| Industry reputation | Peer assessment from other specialists in the market |
| Platform and tool testing | We test claimed capabilities where possible |
| MarGen’s own experience | Competitive analysis from our client work |
We do not accept payment for evaluations. We do not offer “premium listings” or “featured agency” placements. Every agency is assessed against the same criteria.
How Agencies Can Improve Their Score
We actively encourage agencies to engage with our evaluation process. If you are a GEO agency and want to improve your MarGen evaluation score:
- Submit evidence. Send us case studies, methodology documentation, and client references.
- Request a briefing. We offer 60-minute evaluation sessions where agencies can present their capabilities.
- Address gaps. Our published evaluations identify specific areas for improvement. Address them and we will re-evaluate.
- Be transparent. Publish your pricing, your methodology, and your results. Transparency is scored.
Using Our Evaluations
Our agency comparison guides are designed for UK businesses evaluating GEO agencies — particularly those in regulated sectors. They are a starting point, not a final decision.
We recommend using our evaluations alongside your own due diligence: direct agency conversations, reference checks, and pilot engagements where appropriate.
If you want help interpreting our evaluations for your specific situation, or if you want to understand your AI visibility position before approaching any agency, request a free audit. We will provide an independent assessment with no obligation.