State of the AEO Agency Market 2026
The State of the AEO Agency Market 2026 shows what 398 providers of answer engine optimization, generative engine optimization and AI SEO publish about their own work: evidence, pricing, AI measurement, specialization and location. Every figure below shows how many providers it covers, and the data is as of October 27, 2026. The full dataset is free to download as a CSV.
Key findings on the AEO agency market
The key findings on the AEO agency market are below, each with the number of providers it covers.
- A minority of providers publish proof that they get clients into AI answers. 106 of 355 eligible providers publish proof of AI search results for a client: 39 an AI outcome case study with a baseline and method, 33 tracked AI visibility gains and 34 an AI answer or a measured AI result for a named client. Another 232 say they get clients named in AI answers but publish no example or numbers, and 17 show nothing about AI results for clients.
- About half of providers say they report AI visibility. 199 of 355 eligible providers state on their own site that they report AI visibility, citations or share of voice to clients. 33 say they do not, and 123 do not say. Among verified providers the share is 194 of 342.
- Public pricing is the exception. 100 of 355 eligible providers publish a starting price. 88 of them publish a monthly fee, with a median of $1,500 a month, and the middle half of monthly prices runs from $800 to $2,600. The other 12 publish a minimum project size (8), a one-time or program fee (3) or a price that does not say how it is billed (1), which count as published prices but are kept out of the monthly median.
- Case studies are still rare. 139 of 355 eligible providers publish at least one case study with results in a vertical they are ranked for. 95 name clients without results, and 53 have only a vertical service page.
- Most providers are ranked in more than one vertical. 160 of 355 eligible providers are ranked in exactly one vertical, and 112 are ranked in three or more.
- Most providers sell full-service AEO. 341 of 355 sell full-service AEO, 5 work on an advisory basis and 9 sell content.
- Offices are spread across many metros. 167 of 355 eligible providers have a confirmed office in one of the 45 metros we track, led by New York (19), San Diego (12) and Austin (11). 32 are headquartered outside the United States.
- Third-party profiles are common, but detail is not. 368 of 398 profiled providers have an independent third-party profile. Among the 355 eligible providers, only 169 state a team size and 230 say how long they have operated (median 14 years).
- Coverage is selective, by design. 79 of 270 possible vertical-by-metro combinations meet the publication criteria, across 21 metros. Healthcare has the deepest metro coverage with 18 pages; SaaS the thinnest with 5.
Who reports AI visibility
Who reports AI visibility is taken from what each provider says on its own site about reporting AI visibility, citations or share of voice to clients. It is a statement of practice, not a measurement of the provider's own visibility. We show three groups because the share changes with the group.
| Base | Report AI visibility | Say no, or do not state |
|---|---|---|
| All profiled providers | 205 of 398 (52%) | 33 say no; 160 do not say |
| Eligible for a ranking | 199 of 355 (56%) | 33 say no; 123 do not say |
| Verified | 194 of 342 (57%) | 31 say no; 117 do not say |
Proof of AI search results
Proof of AI search results is the strongest item each eligible provider publishes showing a client named, cited or recommended in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews or another AI engine, checked page by page. Only client results count; a provider's own AI visibility does not. The evidence was checked on October 27, 2026.
| Strongest proof of AI results | Eligible providers | Share |
|---|---|---|
| AI outcome case study with a baseline and method | 39 | 11% |
| Tracked AI visibility gains for a client | 33 | 9% |
| An AI answer or a measured AI result for a named client | 34 | 10% |
| AI results claimed, no example or numbers | 232 | 65% |
| Nothing about AI results for clients | 17 | 5% |
272 of 355 eligible providers publish at least one case study with measured search results of any kind. By vertical, the share with proof of AI results ranges from 31 of 130 in Local Business to 41 of 76 in SaaS.
AEO agency pricing by vertical
AEO agency pricing by vertical uses starting prices the providers publish themselves: US dollar figures on their own sites or directory profiles, not hourly rates or project sizes reported in client reviews. 100 of 355 eligible providers publish one, and the rest quote prices on request. Medians use monthly fees only: 88 of the 100 published prices are monthly, and minimum project sizes, one-time fees and program fees count as published prices but are kept out of the medians. Medians use the eligible providers in each vertical, so a provider ranked in two verticals counts in both.
| Vertical | Eligible | Verified | Proof of AI results | Report AI visibility | Disclose a price | Median monthly price | Case studies | Metro pages |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dental | 99 | 92 | 28 of 99 | 56 of 99 | 30 of 99 | $1,500 (26 prices) | 22 of 99 | 11 |
| Legal | 143 | 138 | 37 of 143 | 81 of 143 | 38 of 143 | $1,500 (34 prices) | 36 of 143 | 17 |
| Healthcare | 157 | 151 | 42 of 157 | 90 of 157 | 51 of 157 | $1,500 (43 prices) | 44 of 157 | 18 |
| SaaS | 76 | 76 | 41 of 76 | 59 of 76 | 25 of 76 | $2,250 (22 prices) | 38 of 76 | 5 |
| Home Services | 148 | 143 | 39 of 148 | 79 of 148 | 58 of 148 | $1,500 (55 prices) | 49 of 148 | 14 |
| Local Business | 130 | 125 | 31 of 130 | 73 of 130 | 43 of 130 | $1,325 (42 prices) | 42 of 130 | 14 |
Evidence strength
For each eligible provider, the strongest evidence type found across the verticals it is ranked in. A service page that links to case studies is recorded as a service page; the case study itself has to document a client in that vertical with results.
| Strongest evidence found | Eligible providers | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Case study with results in a ranked vertical | 139 | 39% |
| Works only with that vertical | 60 | 17% |
| Named clients, no results write-up | 95 | 27% |
| A vertical service page only | 53 | 15% |
| Blog posts only | 8 | 2% |
| No evidence in any ranked vertical | 0 | 0% |
AEO agency specialization and offering
AEO agency specialization and offering are shown two ways: how many verticals each eligible provider is ranked in, and what it sells. Provider types: 347 agencies, 8 consultants.
| Verticals ranked in | Eligible providers | Share |
|---|---|---|
| One vertical | 160 | 45% |
| Two verticals | 83 | 23% |
| Three or more | 112 | 32% |
| AEO offering | Eligible providers | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Full service | 341 | 96% |
| Advisory | 5 | 1% |
| Content | 9 | 3% |
| Tools | 0 | 0% |
| Unclear from public pages | 0 | 0% |
Where AEO providers are based
Where AEO providers are based: 167 of 355 eligible providers have a confirmed office in one of the 45 metros we track. 156 are elsewhere in the United States and 32 are headquartered outside the United States. Office and served market are recorded separately, so a remote provider is never shown as local.
| Headquarters metro | Eligible providers | Metro pages |
|---|---|---|
| New York, NY | 19 | 6 |
| San Diego, CA | 12 | 4 |
| Austin, TX | 11 | 4 |
| Denver, CO | 10 | 6 |
| Dallas, TX | 9 | 5 |
| Atlanta, GA | 8 | 5 |
| Chicago, IL | 8 | 5 |
| Tampa, FL | 8 | 4 |
| San Francisco, CA | 7 | 2 |
| Houston, TX | 6 | 5 |
Verification and evidence checks
Verification and evidence checks cover every eligible provider: 342 of 398 profiled providers are verified, meaning we checked the live website, an independent third-party profile and vertical evidence for each, and every eligible provider's proof of AI results was checked on October 27, 2026. Evidence for 2 of 342 was checked in the last 30 days and for 342 of 342 in the last 90. The oldest check on file is dated September 12, 2026 and the newest October 27, 2026.
Method and data notes
- Bases: 398 profiled, 355 eligible for at least one ranking, 342 verified. Eligibility and verification are defined on the methodology page, linked at the top of this report.
- Every data point comes from a public page: the provider's own site or an independent profile. We do not use private submissions from providers, and every check is dated.
- Prices are the lowest US dollar starting figure a provider publishes itself, usually on its pricing page and sometimes on its directory profile. Medians use monthly fees only. Minimum project sizes, usually from a Clutch or DesignRush profile, one-time fees and program fees count as published prices but are kept out of the medians.
- No data from paid placements, subscriptions or profile claims is used in this report, so paid placement never changes a number here.
- The dataset download linked at the top of this report (CSV, one row per profiled provider) carries every field behind these tables. It is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 with credit to EliteAEO.
How to cite
Quote any figure with the number of providers it covers. Journalists and researchers can request breakdowns of the dataset at hello@eliteaeo.ai.