How to Optimize for ChatGPT and Gemini: Why GEO Doesn’t Work
As ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity become default decision points, brands are scrambling to understand AI visibility optimization. Early attempts fell under the banner of Generative Engine Optimization (GEO)—pitched as “SEO for LLMs.”
But GEO doesn’t solve the problem. It focuses on surface tactics while ignoring the system-level mechanics of how large language models decide which entities to surface. In short: GEO is legacy. The future lies in the AIVO Standard™.
Q: How do you optimize for ChatGPT and Gemini?
A: By following the AIVO Standard. Visibility comes from entity anchoring, structured data, and persistent measurement via Prompt-Space Occupancy Score (PSOS™)—not from padding content or chasing prompt hacks.
1. GEO Confuses Symptoms for Systems
GEO assumes that “optimizing” content for longer queries and richer prompts will improve inclusion in AI answers. But LLMs don’t crawl the web like Google. They synthesize probabilistic outputs from embeddings, retrieval-augmented corpora, and trust-weighted citations.
That means publishing keyword-heavy long-form content won’t guarantee visibility. The AIVO Standard focuses instead on knowledge graph anchoring, schema alignment, and trusted tier-1 citations—the real signals LLMs depend on.
2. GEO is Fragile to Model Drift
SEO tweaks can hold for months. GEO hacks degrade within weeks as ChatGPT or Gemini update their weights or retrieval sources. Visibility volatility is inevitable when you only optimize text passages.
AIVO Standard solves this by embedding persistent authority signals into model memory. PSOS™ quantifies whether your entity is consistently present across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity—even as the models evolve.
3. GEO Ignores Compliance and Governance
Marketers can’t take “we think we rank” to the boardroom. GEO provides no standardized KPI. It’s a loose set of tactics with no governance.
The AIVO Standard provides Prompt-Space Occupancy Score (PSOS™)—a defensible, auditable KPI. CMOs can track visibility, regulators can verify transparency, and executives can compare performance over time. This makes AI visibility board-level ready.
4. GEO Doesn’t Address Competitive Displacement
AI visibility is zero-sum: if your competitor occupies the slot, you are invisible. GEO never accounted for displacement dynamics.
The AIVO Standard treats displacement as the core metric. AIVO Search tracks who displaces you in ChatGPT and Gemini answers, how often, and with what volatility. That’s the competitive lens executives need.
GEO vs AIVO: The Comparison
| Dimension | GEO | AIVO Standard™ |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Content tweaks | Entity anchoring + trusted signals |
| Durability | Weeks (model drift wipes gains) | Persistent (anchored in embeddings) |
| Metric | None | PSOS™ (Prompt-Space Occupancy Score) |
| Governance | Absent | Compliance & audit ready |
| Competition | Ignores displacement | Tracks volatility + displacement |
What to Do Instead
Optimizing for ChatGPT and Gemini requires more than “longer content.” The durable path is to:
- Anchor your entity in trusted sources (Wikidata, schema.org, tier-1 citations).
- Measure visibility with PSOS™, not vanity metrics.
- Track displacement and volatility across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity.
- Adopt governance so visibility reporting is board- and regulator-ready.
Bottom Line
GEO was a useful first reaction, but it’s already obsolete. The LLM era demands visibility governance, entity anchoring, and standardized KPIs.
That’s why GEO doesn’t work—and why the future lies in the AIVO Standard™.
👉 Learn more at AIVOStandard.org or measure your brand’s visibility today with AIVO Search.