AI Visibility
measured26/100
Emerging · in Scheduling & Calendar
counts brand mentions in AI answers, not source citations
AEO Readiness
fundamentals56/100
Some gaps
Avg Prompt Score
11
across 160 prompts
AI Share of Voice
11%
across 160 prompts
Critical Issues
4
critical + high
How AI Visibility breaks down
in Scheduling & Calendar
Composite = 50% coverage + 30% engine breadth + 20% position, measured in the brand's strongest category. Position and citation depth join the score once the aggregation pipeline captures them. This is the measured Visibility score — separate from AEO Readiness, which scores fundamentals.
Per-stage performance
Cited rate · share of voice · engine consensus · sentiment, broken out by buyer-journey stage. Sentiment is the net positive−negative skew across engines that cited the brand at this stage.
Categories Timetastic is visible in
1Executive summary
Timetastic is already well-positioned for AI citation in evaluation-stage queries via G2 (34 reviews, 4.6/5) and has crawlable, public pricing plus customer-story pages. The biggest risk is conversion-stage and evaluation-stage “how much / which plan / vs competitor” queries where AI needs structured, crawlable pricing + SoftwareApplication/FAQ structured data and first-party comparison pages; the single highest-ROI fix is to add/verify SoftwareApplication + pricing/FAQ structured data and create first-party “[Timetastic] vs [Competitor]” pages that lead with Timetastic.
Based on audit of timetastic.co.uk · Sep 1, 2026