I Scraped the Top 50 SEO Sites to Learn How to Get Cited by LLMs
I wanted to know how to get cited by LLMs, so I stopped reading opinions and started counting them. Here's what 45 of the top-ranking pages actually tell you to do.
Scraped 2 August 2026 · Method and sources at the bottom of the pageWhat I Did
I put 10 questions into Google. Things like "how to get cited by LLMs" and "how do LLMs choose sources to cite".
That logged 427 results. I took the 50 strongest domains ranking for those questions and had a script read every page.
45 came back readable. Three blocked the request and two handed back almost nothing, so those five are out of the count.
Then the script counted 16 different recommendations across all of them.
What They Agree On
Schema won by a mile. That's the hidden code that tells a machine what's on your page, and 36 of the 45 tell you to add it.
After that it's off-site work. Backlinks on 32 pages, third-party mentions on 30, Reddit and review sites on 27 each.
The tidy formatting advice sits lower than you'd expect. Answer-first on 22 pages, chunking on 12, FAQ headings on 8.
One thing to be straight about. My script counts that a page raises a tactic, not that it swears by it.
So I read the close calls by hand. That's where it got interesting.
The Bit That Stopped Me
Seven pages bring up llms.txt. Only one of them tells you not to bother, and it's Google's own documentation.
Google's guide has a list of things you can ignore. It names llms.txt directly and says Google Search ignores the file.
That same list says there's no requirement to chunk your content into tiny pieces. Eleven other pages in my sample raise chunking as a tactic.
It also says you don't need to rewrite content just for AI systems. That's most of the formatting advice, gone in one line.
Two separate studies back Google up on llms.txt. SE Ranking checked around 300,000 domains and found their model performed better without it. ALLMO looked at 94,614 cited URLs and found exactly one citation pointing at an llms.txt file.
What the Count Actually Proves
Not much on its own, and that's the honest read.
A tally tells you what people publish. It doesn't tell you what works.
36 pages saying "add schema" is 36 people agreeing, not 36 tests. On llms.txt, where independent data does exist, the crowd lost.
Here's the pattern I keep coming back to. Strip out the advice that's contested and you're left with backlinks, brand mentions, community presence and reviews.
All of that happens somewhere other than your website.
Most of what gets sold as AI search work is on-page work aimed at an off-site problem.
What I'd Do First
Rank for the question. The models search, so page one is still the door.
Check a bot can fetch the page. If it can't read you, nothing else on this list matters.
Go get mentioned by other people. Podcasts, roundups, review sites, real threads where your buyer already is.
Publish something only you have. Your own numbers beat a rewritten summary of someone else's.
Add schema because it's cheap and tidy, not because you think it's the lever.
Take it from me, that last one is where most budgets quietly disappear.
Related Questions
What's the best way to get cited by LLMs?
Rank for the question first, then get talked about off your own site. Those two show up in the data and nobody argues with them.
Do I need an llms.txt file?
No. Google's documentation says Search ignores it, and two independent studies found no citation benefit.
Is schema markup worth adding?
Yes, it's cheap and it helps machines read you. Just don't expect it to be the thing that gets you named.
Should I chunk my content into small blocks?
Google says there's no requirement. Write for the person reading it.
How do I know where I stand right now?
Measure it before you change anything. That's what the AI search optimization services page is for.
Method and Sources
- 10 Google queries pulled 2 August 2026, United States, desktop, top 50 results each · 427 organic results logged
- 50 publisher domains selected by rank across queries · forums, video and social excluded · 45 pages read, 5 blocked the request
- Counts are per page, by pattern match, then hand-checked where the reading was close
- Google Search Central, “Optimizing your website for generative AI features on Google Search”
- SE Ranking, “LLMs.txt: Why Brands Rely On It and Why It Doesn't Work”, Yulia Deda, 7 Nov 2025
- ALLMO, “LLMs.txt for AI Search Report 2026”, 23 Jan 2026
Want to know if AI is naming you or your competitor?
Tell me what you sell and who you're up against. I'll run the questions and send you what I find.