Start with the responsibility, not the label
AEO, GEO and AIEO do not have one settled commercial definition. The labels cover software, specialist services, content programmes and combinations of all three. Academic work on GEO has examined how changes to public content can affect visibility in generated answers; newer research has concentrated on how that visibility should be measured across repeated runs. Google, meanwhile, says there are no special technical requirements beyond its established Search foundations for appearing in its AI features.
The useful comparison is therefore not a feature contest. It is the job a buyer needs completed.
| Decision criterion | A common AEO/GEO/visibility starting point | Delphic |
|---|---|---|
| Job being bought | Observe or improve how selected brands and public surfaces appear for a configured set of prompts. | Decide which buyer-question markets the firm can credibly own, then manage its position in them. |
| Starting unit | A prompt, page, domain, topic or campaign already chosen for attention. | A commercially meaningful question family connected to authority the firm legitimately holds. |
| Evidence standard | Evidence from the prompts, pages or domains configured for the implementation; sampling, definitions and records vary by provider. | Repeated observation across relevant engines and natural forms of the question; Discovery, Authority, Brand evaluation and Competitive standing kept separate; responses, sources and uncertainty preserved. |
| After observation | Reporting, recommendations or execution within an agreed content, technical or campaign scope. | An evidence-gated path from measurement through diagnosis, approved treatment, remeasurement and continuing management. |
| Protected knowledge | Governed through the provider's scope and the firm's normal approval process. | Treated as a commercial variable in deciding which questions to pursue and what may become public. |
| Lasting asset | A monitored or improved set of prompts, pages, domains or campaigns. | A managed portfolio connecting question markets, AI position, public evidence, decisions and change over time. |
| Strongest fit | The firm already knows what to monitor or improve and wants bounded observation or execution. | The firm must determine the right markets, protect valuable expertise and join the decisions end to end. |
Delphic's responsibility is public and explicit: question mapping, baseline measurement, potential estimation, diagnosis, approved treatment, remeasurement and ongoing management belong to one connected service. The client remains the authority on truth and commercial priority and approves every decision that moves protected knowledge across the public line.
These are common starting points, not universal claims about every provider. Some products include substantial managed work. Some agencies take responsibility well beyond content. A buyer should verify the operating responsibility rather than infer it from the label.
Different jobs can coexist
SEO remains important to crawlability, indexability and the public source foundation. A visibility product can contribute useful observations. A specialist can implement part of an approved treatment. Delphic does not require those jobs to disappear.
Its role is different where the firm sells expertise, research, data, method or judgement and the buyer question itself is the commercial market. Here, monitoring known prompts is only part of the decision. Someone must also establish which questions are worth owning, distinguish Discovery, Authority, Brand evaluation and Competitive standing, decide what evidence can safely become public and determine whether an intervention worked.
That broader responsibility is more intensive. It requires access to the firm's real expertise and client approval at the disclosure boundary. It is justified when the cost of choosing the wrong market—or exposing the wrong knowledge—is greater than the convenience of a narrower tool.
Choose by the responsibility still missing
A useful procurement conversation can be reduced to four questions:
- Are the commercially important buyer questions already known, or must they be derived from the authority the firm actually holds?
- Is the need to observe selected surfaces, or to diagnose and manage the firm's position question by question?
- Who owns the decision about what protected knowledge may become public?
- What happens after a movement is observed: reporting, bounded execution or accountable management through remeasurement?
The answer may be a conventional product, a specialist service, Delphic or a deliberate combination. The framework is public because buyers should be able to see the difference. Delphic keeps private the detailed methods used to select markets, measure position, diagnose gaps, choose treatments and govern the complete process.
Similar language can conceal a different job
Two approaches can both promise “AI visibility” while managing different assets. One may accurately monitor a set of prompts and improve the pages attached to them. Another may determine which question markets matter, whether the firm deserves a stronger position, what evidence can move it and whether that movement is worth the disclosure cost.
Neither is automatically better. The mistake is buying the first job when the firm still needs the second. A sound comparison makes the missing responsibility visible before convenience, speed or price decides the category.