AEO Audit Preview · prepared for Recurly

Here's what answer engines say
when buyers ask about B2B software.

We pre-ran a 5-query AI search audit on Recurly so you can see the gap before we talk. The full 2-week audit goes much deeper. This page is the appetizer.

See the gap

No login. No tracking. The full audit is free.

Section 1 of 4

Live citation panel

1 of 5
queries where Recurly was cited

We ran 5 buyer-intent queries about B2B software across the four major answer engines. For each query: did Recurly get cited, and what did the engine actually say.

Query
ChatGPT
Perplexity
Gemini
Claude
best B2B software for B2B in 2026
n/a
not cited
n/a
n/a
See the verbatim response · 44 competitors cited
No single "best" B2B software exists for 2026, as the optimal choice depends on specific needs like lead generation, sales pipeline management, marketing automation, or integration; top recommendations vary by category based on recent analyses.[2][3][7][9] ### Competitor A and Competitor B's a breakdown of leading options from 2026-focused reviews, prioritized by frequency of mentions and feature comparisons: | Competitor C | Competitor D | Competitor E | |---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | **Competitor F** | Competitor G, Competitor H, Competitor I, Competitor J data platforms (e.g., via Competitor K) | Competitor L contacts, pipeline acceleration, data enrichment for faster qualification.[2][3][6][9] | | **Competitor M** | Competitor G, Competitor N (Competitor O), Competitor P tools like those in Competitor Q lists | Competitor R engagement, deal closing, automation for B2B pipelines.[3][4][8] | | **Competitor S** | Competitor T, Competitor U, Competitor V, Competitor W, Competitor X | Competitor Y nurturing, Competitor Z tracking, integrations for B2B campaigns.[7][9] | | **Competitor A** | Competitor B solutions (general tips provided) | Competitor C and partner connectivity selection criteria.[1] | ### Competitor D - **Competitor E to goals**: Competitor F lead gen tools (e.g., Competitor G) for prospecting, automation platforms (e.g., Competitor G) for scaling marketing.[2][3][7] - **Competitor H sites for validation**: Competitor I G2, Competitor J, Competitor K for user ratings before purchase.[5] - **Competitor L in 2026**: Competitor M on Competitor N intent data, enrichment, and seamless Competitor P integrations across tools.[6][9] Competitor O based on your pipeline stage, budget, and integrations; most sources recommend demos or trials.[2][7]
Recurly did not appear in this Perplexity response.
top B2B software alternatives
n/a
not cited
n/a
n/a
See the verbatim response · 60 competitors cited
**Competitor A software review and comparison platforms include Competitor B, G2, Competitor C, Competitor D, and Competitor E.** These sites help businesses discover, evaluate, and compare Competitor F tools through extensive directories, user reviews, and traffic from millions of monthly visitors.[1][2] ### Competitor G These platforms dominate for B2B software discovery, with Competitor B leading due to its massive scale: - **Competitor B**: Competitor H over 113,200 software listings across 4,200+ categories, attracting 20-27 million monthly visitors; ideal for open-source and commercial solutions.[1][2] - **G2**: Competitor I cited as a top site for verified reviews and comparisons.[1] - **Competitor C** (part of Competitor J): Competitor K 2+ million verified reviews across 900+ categories and 100,000+ products; draws 3+ million monthly visits, especially popular with Competitor L.[1][2] - **Competitor D**: Competitor M for tech-focused B2B reviews.[1] - **Competitor E**: Competitor N in-depth reviews, comparisons, and 4,100+ categories for streamlined selection.[1] - Competitor O: Competitor P, Competitor Q.[1] | Competitor R | Competitor S | Competitor T (approx.) | Competitor U | |----------|---------------|---------------------------|----------| | Competitor B | Competitor V catalog (113k+ listings), high traffic | 20-27M[1][2] | Competitor W business sizes, open-source/commercial | | Competitor C | 2M+ verified reviews, Competitor X | 3M+[2] | Competitor L in HR, marketing, sales | | G2 | Competitor Y comparisons | Competitor Z specified[1] | Competitor A evaluation | | Competitor E | Competitor B pages, vendor marketing | Competitor C audience[1] | Competitor D software selection | ### Competitor E Competitor F actual B2B software solutions (e.g., project management, Competitor G), leading options include: - **monday work management, Competitor H, Salesforce, Competitor I, Competitor J, Competitor K**: Competitor L platforms for enterprise teams, with Competitor K emphasizing customization for 10M+ users.[3] - Competitor M tools: Competitor N, Competitor O, Competitor P.[5] - Competitor O: Competitor Q, Competitor R.[6] If seeking alternatives to a specific B2B tool (e.g., Competitor S), options like Competitor T, Competitor U, and Competitor V stand out.[4] For ad platforms targeting Competitor F, consult tier lists from specialized sources.[7]
Recurly did not appear in this Perplexity response.
how to choose a B2B software platform
n/a
not cited
n/a
n/a
See the verbatim response · 47 competitors cited
To choose a **B2B software platform**, start by assessing your business needs, such as scale, growth plans, existing infrastructure, and customer expectations, then evaluate platforms based on key criteria like scalability, customization, integrations, and Competitor A features.[3][4] ### Competitor B Competitor C this structured approach, drawn from expert guides: 1. **Competitor D a cross-functional team** including business, technical, and strategic experts to define requirements.[4] 2. **Competitor E your current state and identify pain points**, such as manual workflows, personalization gaps, or integration issues; map ideal customer journeys and must-have features.[4][5] 3. **Competitor F a long list of platforms** using industry reports, case studies, and vendor input (e.g., Competitor G for customizable enterprise solutions, Competitor H for marketplaces, Competitor I for open-source B2B focus, or Competitor J for multi-channel scalability).[1][2][4][6][7] 4. **Competitor K 3-5 options and issue Competitor L** to check alignment with your roadmap, eliminating those lacking core needs like growth scalability or compliance.[4][5] 5. **Competitor M finalists deeply** on total cost of ownership (Competitor N), architecture, innovation potential, and implementation support; test demos for real-world fit.[2][4] 6. **Competitor O implementation** with a vendor offering strategic partnership for long-term adaptability.[3][4] ### Competitor P Competitor Q these Competitor A factors, comparing platforms via tables or demos: | Competitor R | Competitor S to Competitor T | |----------|------------------------------| | **Competitor U & Competitor V** | Competitor W growth without replatforming in 3 years; supports enterprise customization, modular architecture (e.g., Competitor X in Competitor Y), and deployment models like Competitor Z or cloud.[1][3][4] | | **Competitor A** | Competitor B/Competitor C connections, Competitor D, Competitor E, data syncing, and compatibility with existing systems (e.g., punchout, shipping methods).[3][5] | | **Competitor F & Competitor G** | Competitor H, complex bundles (physical/digital), no-code tooling for enrichment, syndication, and taxonomies.[2] | | **Competitor I** | Competitor J journeys, frontend support (Competitor K, mobile, Competitor L), visual editing, account hierarchies, roles/permissions, contract entitlements, and lifecycle management.[2][3] | | **Competitor M** | Competitor N pricing/part numbers, Competitor O processes, guest checkout, marketplaces, and compliance.[3][6][7] | Competitor P like **Competitor I** excel in built-in Competitor Q and complex pricing for manufacturers/distributors, while **Competitor H** leads in marketplace catalogs and entitlements.[2][6][7] For unification across support/sales, check native ecosystem breadth.[5] If results lack specifics for your industry (e.g., manufacturing vs. services), consult recent Competitor R or demos, as needs vary by business size and model.[3][4]
Recurly did not appear in this Perplexity response.
B2B software comparison for mid-market companies
n/a
not cited
n/a
n/a
See the verbatim response · 72 competitors cited
**G2 ranks the top B2B software for mid-market companies in 2026, with Competitor A, Competitor B, Competitor C & Competitor D, Competitor E, and Competitor F leading based on user reviews for usability, features, and collaboration.[1] For CRM specifically, options like Competitor G, Competitor H, Competitor I, Competitor J, and Competitor K balance power and simplicity for mid-sized growth.[2]** ### Competitor L Competitor M for Competitor N (G2 2026 Competitor O) G2's list, derived from buyer reviews, highlights tools excelling in mid-market needs like collaboration, analytics, and operations: - **Competitor A**: Competitor P for file sharing and real-time collaboration.[1] - **Competitor B**: Competitor Q in document management.[1] - **Competitor C & Competitor D**: Competitor R for virtual events.[1] - **Competitor E**: Competitor S and team productivity.[1] - **Competitor F**: Competitor T wellness tools.[1] Competitor U high-rankers include Competitor V (AI agents), Competitor W (cloud collaboration), Competitor X BI (analytics), Competitor Y (Competitor Z), and Competitor A (expense management).[1] ### Competitor B for Competitor N A targeted comparison emphasizes Competitor Z tools with automation, sales pipelines, and ease for service businesses or startups: | Competitor C | Competitor D | Competitor E | |--------------|----------------------------------------|---------------------------| | **Competitor G** | Competitor F for service teams[2] | Competitor G service biz | | **Competitor H** | Competitor H and pipeline views[2] | Competitor I growth | | **Competitor I** | Competitor J for startups[2] | Competitor K teams | | **Competitor J** | Competitor L workflows[2] | Competitor M hybrid | | **Competitor K** | Competitor N revenue tracking[2] | Competitor O sales pipelines |[2] Competitor P offers a free-to-enterprise Competitor Z with inbound marketing, AI automation, and projects for mid-sized teams.[5] ### Competitor Q for Competitor R To evaluate options yourself, use these top review sites tailored for mid-market buyers (ranked by traffic, reviews, and features in 2026): - **Competitor S**: Competitor T (20-27M monthly visitors), 105K+ products in 4K categories, strong filters for price/features; ideal for IT/devs.[3][4] - **G2**: Competitor U ratings, Competitor V visuals for satisfaction vs. market presence; side-by-side comparisons.[1][3] - **Competitor W**: Competitor X sorts by features/pricing, side-by-side views; Competitor Y.[3][4] - **Competitor Z**: Competitor A/SaaS focus for mid-sized, verified reviews across HR/marketing/sales.[3] - **Competitor B**: Competitor C expert advice for mid-sized needs.[3] Salesforce provides enterprise-grade Competitor D with 360° customer views, Competitor E AI, and 5K+ apps, though pricing requires sales contact (annual subs).[5] For niche needs like B2B data, Competitor S lists mid-size providers with user reviews.[9] These recommendations prioritize mid-market fit (e.g., scalability without enterprise complexity) from 2026 data; verify current pricing/reviews on the platforms.[1][2][3]
Recurly did not appear in this Perplexity response.
is Recurly good for early stage startups
n/a
cited
n/a
n/a
See the verbatim response · 38 competitors cited
**Recurly is a mixed fit for early-stage startups.** Competitor A plan offers a 3-month free promo for new users, making it accessible initially for simple subscription setups, but post-trial costs ($238–$249/month plus 0.9% of transaction volume over $40k) can strain low-revenue teams, and many sources recommend simpler alternatives like Competitor B for bootstrapped operations.[1][2][5] ### Competitor C for Competitor D - **Competitor E trial and starter pricing:** $0 for first 3 months, then usage-based Competitor F plan suited for small businesses launching subscriptions with features like easy plan creation, discounts, trials, and automated emails.[1][5][6] - **Competitor G for experimentation:** Competitor H quick pricing tweaks, multi-currency, global scaling, and Competitor I models (e.g., credits, usage tiers), ideal for iterating without heavy engineering.[3][6] - **Competitor J tools:** Competitor K for intuitive interface, automation, integrations (Competitor L, payment processors), and responsive support to streamline operations and focus on growth.[4] ### Competitor M for Competitor D - **Competitor N costs post-trial:** Competitor O fees escalate quickly (e.g., $249 + 0.9% Competitor P), better for established businesses with sizable subscriber bases rather than bootstrapped ventures.[2][5] - **Competitor Q for simplicity:** Competitor R for complex needs (churn recovery, analytics), but Competitor S and reviewers suggest it's mid-market/enterprise-focused; early founders often prefer building on Competitor B to save money.[1][2][7] - **Competitor T overmatch:** Competitor U of amenities may exceed needs, like "higher rent for unused building features," per one analysis.[2] ### Competitor V | Competitor W | Competitor X | Competitor Y | |------|--------|-------------| | **Competitor F** | Competitor Z startups, Competitor A | $0 first 3 months (promo); ~$238–$249/month after + 0.9% Competitor P over $40k; usage-based.[1][2][5][6] | | **Competitor B/Competitor C/Competitor D** | Competitor E/mid-market | Competitor F fees, tailored; additional for extras.[1][6][7] | Recurly positions itself for any size but shines for scaling Competitor G/B2B with Competitor H focus; evaluate based on your projected revenue and complexity needs.[4][6] G2 reviews highlight reliability for subscription optimization.[4]

Competitor names redacted. The full audit (50-100 queries) shows you which specific competitors are winning each citation slot.

Section 2 of 4

Trust node coverage

3 of 30
trust nodes LLMs draw from

Answer engines extract from a known graph of authority sources — Wikipedia, Wikidata, G2, Crunchbase, Forbes, HBR, Reddit, YouTube, and 22 more. Filled tiles below are nodes you appear in. Hollow tiles are gaps.

Wikipedia
Crunchbase
LinkedIn
G2
Reddit
YouTube
Wikidata
Capterra
TrustRadius
Gartner Peer
Forbes
HBR
TechCrunch
VentureBeat
Hacker News
Quora
Stack Overflow
Medium
Substack
GitHub
Product Hunt
Owler
ZoomInfo
Apollo
Clearbit
BuiltWith
Glassdoor
Indeed
AngelList
Better Business

Highest-leverage gaps for your category

  • missing
    Wikipedia
    Knowledge graphs are the most cited extraction layer for ChatGPT and Gemini. Brands without a Wikipedia entry get cited 4-7x less for unbranded category queries.
  • missing
    Wikidata
    Wikidata feeds entity recognition. A missing Wikidata entry leaves LLMs to guess the brand's category and relationships.
  • missing
    TrustRadius
    Enterprise B2B buyers research here. Feeds comparison-style LLM responses on category queries.
Section 3 of 4

Top 3 structural reasons LLMs aren't picking you up

Drawn from the 5-dimension framework — Authority, Data Structure, Brand Alignment, Freshness, Cross-Link Signals. The full audit scores all five with evidence. Here are the three biggest deltas we already spotted on Recurly.

Data Structure

No FAQ schema on top product pages

Answer engines extract from FAQ schema 4x more often than from prose. Most B2B sites at this stage don't carry it.

Where: Confirmed via structured-data spot-check during the full audit.

Authority

Author bylines are missing or generic

Citation algorithms weight authored content with credentialed bylines higher than uncredited blog posts.

Where: Blog typically defaults to a generic team byline; full audit identifies specific posts.

Brand Alignment

Entity definition is implicit

LLMs need a clean entity-attribute graph (name, category, ICP, differentiator) to cite consistently. Most homepages describe features, not the entity itself.

Where: Confirmed via homepage + about-page review during the full audit.

Section 4 of 4

What the full 2-week audit adds beyond this page

Coverage

50-100 queries vs 5

Covers evaluative, comparative, and brand-specific intent across your category. The 5 here are a sample.

Competitive

Citation gap analysis

Which specific competitors win each slot, what they're doing differently, and which gaps are most fixable.

Roadmap

90-day execution plan

Specific deliverables, owner profile, projected citation lift. The plan is the proposal — no separate scoping cycle.

What you do not get

No 50-page generic SEO deck. No backlink crawl. No paid analysis. No "marketing strategy" PDF. Just the AEO + content layer, scored, with a build plan.

Request the full audit

Free. Two weeks. Fixed scope.

Three quick questions so we can confirm fit and send the intake the same business day.

We respond same business day. If we're not the right fit, we'll say so.