Generative Engine Optimization
Vendor-selection prompts.
- Home
- Industries
- SaaS
Vertical programme
SEO and AI visibility for SaaS
By the time anyone contacts you the shortlist usually exists. We work on the pages and prompts that build it.
At a glance
- Buying motion
- Committee-led
- Decisive content
- Comparison pages
- Key prompt type
- Vendor selection
- Refresh trigger
- Product releases
- Needs
- Sales access
What changes in this vertical
Software buyers evaluate in public: review sites, peer conversation and assistants. Your own site is often consulted to confirm a decision rather than to make one.
Evaluation beats awareness
Most SaaS teams have too much awareness content and too little evaluation content.
Affiliates own your comparison query
If you do not publish it, someone with a different incentive will.
Champions need ammunition
Content that arms the internal advocate converts better than content aimed at the buyer alone.
How software buyers actually reach a shortlist
Research happens across review sites, peer conversation and increasingly an assistant, before your site is ever opened.
The shortlist forms without you
Your site confirms rather than creates the decision.
Comparison queries carry the intent
“X vs Y” and “alternatives to X” is where deals are decided.
Integration questions block purchases
Stack compatibility is asked early and answered badly by most vendors.
Where programmes usually go wrong
Most teams publish diligently and still lose the deals that were decided elsewhere.
Top-of-funnel volume
A blog full of category explainers reaches people who are not buying and misses the ones who are.
Evaluation-stage weighting: Comparison, alternatives and integration pages first, because that is where the decision happens.
Refusing to name competitors
The comparison page gets written anyway, by an affiliate with an incentive that is not yours.
Honest comparison pages: Published by you, conceding where you genuinely lose, which is both more persuasive and more citable.
Content that goes stale after a release
Comparison content describing a product two versions old damages trust more than no content.
Refresh tied to the release cycle: Evaluation content reviewed against your releases and competitor changes.
No integration coverage
Stack compatibility answered only in a footer.
A page per real integration: Specific setup detail and use cases, capturing high-intent demand nobody else serves.
How an engagement runs here
The same five phases we run for every client, with the vertical detail set out at each one. The full model is on our methodology page.
Audit
Day 01 to 10Baseline against a vendor-selection prompt set, plus sessions with sales on which competitors and objections actually appear in deals.
6 platforms500+ queriesBaseline reportDiagnose
Day 11 to 21Whether you are absent from the shortlist because you do not rank, because your entity does not resolve, or because an affiliate owns your comparison query.
Content gapsEntity deficitCorpus gapsArchitect
Day 22 to 30A roadmap weighted to evaluation-stage content, with the comparison and integration set prioritised against real deal data.
90-day roadmapPillar planEntity planExecute
Day 31 to 180Foundation and product schema first, then comparison and alternatives pages, then integration coverage for the top stack combinations.
Embedded teamWeekly shipMonthly reviewMonitor
OngoingPrompt-set position and evaluation-page conversion tracked together, with a refresh queue triggered by your releases.
Weekly scansDrift alertsQBR recalibration
What you receive each month
Reported against pipeline stages rather than published volume.
01
Evaluation-page performance
Traffic, ranking and conversion for comparison and integration pages.
02
Prompt-set position
Whether models name you on vendor-selection prompts, and who appears beside you.
03
Competitive movement
Changes in competitor content and positioning.
04
Content refresh queue
Which pages your latest release made inaccurate.
05
Pipeline attribution
Which content produced qualified demand.
06
Next-cycle plan
Next comparisons and integrations, and what we are retiring.
Services that apply here
Frequently asked questions
Should we publish comparison pages against competitors?
Yes. Buyers search for them regardless, and if you do not publish one an affiliate will, with an incentive that is not aligned with yours. A page that concedes genuine weaknesses outperforms one that does not.
How do we get named by AI assistants on vendor prompts?
Resolvable entity, honest comparison content, and third-party corroboration from sources models retrieve. Your own site alone is rarely sufficient.
Is top-of-funnel content a waste?
Not a waste, but usually over-weighted. Most SaaS teams have far too much awareness content and far too little evaluation content.
How often should comparison pages be updated?
Whenever your product or your competitor’s changes materially. Stale comparison content is worse than none, because prospects and models both treat the inaccuracy as a credibility signal.