u/Altruistic-Meal6846

Been noticing a big shift in how brands approach geo and aeo in 2026. it’s not just about ranking on google anymore, it’s more about how often you appear in ai answers and how visible your content is across different discovery channels.

what’s interesting is how marketing strategy tools are now being used way beyond traditional seo. instead of only tracking keywords, brands are starting to look at full funnel visibility, including how users discover them through ai-generated answers, comparison summaries, and indirect referrals.

most teams are also reworking their content structure. instead of long keyword-heavy pages, they’re focusing more on clear explanations, direct answers, updated data, and topic authority. the goal is basically to make content easy for both humans and ai systems to interpret and reuse.

another big change is how performance is being measured. website engagement tracking and broader traffic pattern analysis are becoming more important than just rankings. brands want to understand not only if they rank, but if they’re actually being surfaced inside ai-driven search experiences.

i also noticed a lot of companies now combine multiple marketing strategy tools instead of relying on just one platform. they’re trying to connect visibility data, audience behavior, and content performance into a single view so they can adjust faster.

overall it feels like geo and aeo are pushing everyone toward more adaptive content strategies instead of static seo playbooks.

curious how other people here are adapting their workflows for this shift in 2026.

Three weeks from our SOC 2 Type 2 audit.

Our access request workflow routes approvals to the requester's direct manager. Four department heads also manage their own system access. They submit, it routes to them, they approve. Nobody built a conflict check, the system just reads the manager field in the HRIS and sends it there.

Went back through 12 months of access grants. 34 self-approvals across three departments. All of them look clean in the system, proper workflow, timestamp, approval record. The approver just happens to be the requester.

Segregation of duties on access approvals is a standard auditor question. I don't have a clean answer.

Planning to document this proactively as a known gap with a remediation plan rather than let them find it cold. Has anyone presented a self-identified SOC 2 control gap to an auditor before the window closes? What did the finding actually look like and did proactive disclosure help?

Three clients called this month asking why their competitors show up on ChatGPT and they don't. all three are in home services. plumbing, renovation, HVAC. local businesses that were doing fine on Google six months ago

now traffic is down and when i run their brand names or their core queries through ChatGPT and Perplexity they are just not there. competitors are getting cited, getting recommended, showing up in answers for stuff like best plumber near me or top renovation companies in the area. we have zero data on why. no citation tracking, no AI brand visibility monitoring, no way to show clients what is happening or what to do about it

the worst part is i can't even tell them if this is fixable or how long it would takeanyone running local or home services clients dealing with this.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

So i've been running both tools side by side for a few months now across some client accounts and i still can't fully make up my mind

SimilarWeb is genuinely better when it comes to audience demographics. i'm talking real breakdowns industry, age, location, device stuff that actually matters when you're doing b2b targeting. had a client last month ask why their traffic was spiking from a weird referral source and SimilarWeb was the one that told me who those visitors actually were. SEMrush just showed me the spike happened

SEMrush still does keyword tracking better in my opinion. competitor gap analysis, position changes, backlinks it's all cleaner and faster to pull. but every time i need to go deeper on who the audience is it just feels surface level

price wise i'm paying for both right now which feels dumb but dropping either one feels risky for certain clients

anyone else running both or did you eventually pick one? curious if people are finding SimilarWeb more useful as AI search data becomes a bigger part of reporting.

also open to hearing if there's something else people are using for the audience demographics piece specifically.

We are mid audit right now. Auditor sent a sample of 25 user accounts and asked us to provide the approval record for each one showing who authorized access, when, and to what.

For about 20 of them we have Jira tickets. Fine. For 5 of them the access was granted because someone messaged the IT person directly in Slack and they just did it. The DM exists. The IT person remembers doing it. But a Slack DM between two people is not exactly what auditors mean when they say documented approval. No timestamp exported, no approver field, no formal record that the person being granted access had a business need that someone with authority signed off on.

Our auditor was not impressed. We are not going to get an exception on these but we are going to get a finding and they want to see a remediation plan before they close the report.

The frustrating part is that the access itself was completely legitimate. The right person got the right access for the right reason. It just was not captured anywhere that an auditor can sample cleanly. The security was fine. The evidence was not.

We are now retroactively trying to build a lightweight request and approval workflow that is not so heavy that engineers route around it by just messaging IT on Slack again. Has anyone found a middle ground between full blown IGA tooling and pure honor system that actually produces evidence auditors accept?

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]