Public sample

AI Visibility and Tech Audit for
BetBrain

GAIO audit for BetBrain (betbrain.com). 5 page scoring runs (RankBee), 5-phase crawl audit across 15 bots and 4 LLM providers, 10 buyer prompts run against 5 AI engines via hybrid self-retrieval. Owner context: GSH Online Media (Bucharest), post-EveryMatrix acquisition.

Default visibility: public. Anyone with the link can read this report. Sign in to your RankBee account to make it private to your team.
BB
BetBrain
betbrain.com
Generated20 May 2026
Audit windowLast 14 days
Report IDgaio-1779258307280-d6x43hy03
What's in this report

Four sections covering technical access, AI visibility, content, and reputation.

This is more than a crawl audit. We measure where your buyers go to find you, what AI says when they ask, and what's missing from your story.

01Content Scorecard

Content scorecard — page vs page vs live competitor URLs

RankBee scored each BetBrain page against every URL that ranks for its target queries. Tennis and casino-bonus win outright; Premier League finishes a close 3rd; homepage drops to mid-pack; the about page wouldn't even fetch through our scoring pipeline (a tell in itself).

Page-by-page scoring
As % · 5 pages graded
22% your avg25% leader avg
Page
Your score
Leader
Δ
Homepage
https://www.betbrain.com/
14%
18%
https://www.similarweb.com/website/oddschecker.com/competitors/
4%
About BetBrain
https://www.betbrain.com/about-betbrain
12%
21%
https://www.betbrain.com/about-betbrain
9%
Premier League odds
https://www.betbrain.com/football-betting-odds/england/premier-league
27%
29%
https://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/winner
2%
Casino bonus
https://www.betbrain.com/casino-bonus
28%
20%
https://www.betbrain.com/casino-bonus
8%
Tennis odds
https://www.betbrain.com/tennis-odds
29%
21%
https://www.betbrain.com/tennis-odds
8%

Content quality leaderboard

i
Weighted average across audited pages
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
Similarweb
25%
8.00
2.
Oddspedia
23%
5.00
3.
BetBrain
22%
3.20
4.
Zoominfo
21%
9.60
5.
CreditCards.com
20%
8.60
6.
GamingAmerica
20%
8.80
7.
Dimers
19%
8.80
8.
LegalSportsReport
19%
7.40
9.
Oddschecker
18%
5.40
10.
OddsPortal
17%
5.60
02AI Rankings Matrix

Rankings — citations per engine, per prompt

10 buyer-intent prompts (vendor evaluation, match-level, bonus-hunting, trust/methodology) run live across 5 AI engines (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews). BetBrain appears in 4 of 50 cells. The top three brands by citation coverage — Oddschecker,...

ChatGPT
GPT-5.4 (Bright Data SERP)
30%you
vs 70% Oddschecker · -40 pp gap
Gemini
3.x (Bright Data SERP)
0%you
vs 30% Oddschecker · -30 pp gap
Perplexity
Sonar (Bright Data SERP)
10%you
vs 60% Oddschecker · -50 pp gap
Claude
Sonnet 4.6 web (Anthropic API)
0%you
vs 100% Oddschecker · -100 pp gap
AI Overviews
Google (Bright Data SERP)
0%you
vs 100% Oddschecker · -100 pp gap
AI coverage matrix
All 10 prompts shown
YouOddschecker (leader)OddsPortalOddspediaCovers
#
Prompt
ChatGPT
Gemini
Perplexity
Claude
AI Overviews
1
Vendor evaluation
What is the best odds comparison site in 2026 for serious sports bettors?
2
Vendor evaluation
Compare Oddschecker vs OddsPortal vs Oddspedia vs BetExplorer for odds comparison - which is best?
3
Vendor evaluation
What are the best Oddschecker alternatives for comparing bookmaker odds across multiple sports?
4
Match-level intent
Where can I find the best odds for Premier League football matches this weekend across multiple bookmakers?
5
Match-level intent
Which odds comparison platform should I use for Champions League knockout matches?
6
Match-level intent
What is the best site to compare tennis odds for ATP and WTA tournaments?
7
Bonus & free-bet hunting
Best free bet offers and welcome bonuses from UK bookmakers comparison sites in 2026
8
Bonus & free-bet hunting
Which site has the best casino welcome bonus comparison for UK players?
9
Trust & methodology
Which odds comparison sites are genuinely independent and not owned by a bookmaker operator?
10
Trust & methodology
Are odds comparison sites reliable - how do they make money and can punters trust their recommendations?

AI Coverage Leaderboard

i
Across 50 prompt × model cells
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
Oddschecker
72%
2.39
2.
OddsPortal
60%
2.23
3.
Oddspedia
26%
2.92
4.
Covers
24%
3.33
5.
bet365
22%
5.00
6.
OLBG
20%
2.50
7.
Punter2Pro
18%
2.89
8.
Paddy Power
16%
3.13
9.
Reddit
16%
3.25
10.
OddsJam
16%
2.88
11.
BetExplorer
16%
3.25
12.
BettingGods
16%
4.25
13.
Flashscore
14%
2.71
14.
Ladbrokes
12%
3.00
15.
William Hill
10%
4.40
16.
Racing Post
10%
2.80
17.
YouTube
10%
3.20
18.
Mike Cruickshank
10%
5.20
19.
OddsJet
10%
2.40
21.
BetBrain
8%
2.25
03AI Crawlability Audit

Crawlability — what AI bots can actually fetch

BetBrain's robots.txt is welcoming, but the edge is hostile. 53% of the AI/search bots that drive answer-engine citations time out at the CDN — even though they're explicitly allowed. Result: AI indexes BetBrain through stale prior knowledge and third-party data brokers...

PHASE 1

Robots.txt analysis

Permissive — all bots allowed

What your robots.txt declares to each AI crawler, and which bots are allowed, blocked, or partially restricted.

RiskLowCrawlers18Allowed18Blocked0Partial0
robots.txt200· 22 lines2026-05-20T06:25:16Z
🚨Key risks flagged
🛠
🔍
allowed!partialblocked
Bot
Provider
Role
Status
Rule applied
GPTBot
OpenAI
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — but blocked at edge (see phase 3)
ChatGPT-User
OpenAI
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — but blocked at edge
OAI-SearchBot
OpenAI
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — but blocked at edge
ClaudeBot
Anthropic
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — reaches origin (200)
Claude-User
Anthropic
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — reaches origin (200)
Claude-SearchBot
Anthropic
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — reaches origin (200)
anthropic-ai
Anthropic
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Google-Extended
Google
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — Googlebot still blocked at edge
GoogleOther
Google
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — Googlebot still blocked at edge
PerplexityBot
Perplexity
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — but blocked at edge
Perplexity-User
Perplexity
Allow
Allow
robots Allow — but blocked at edge
CCBot
Common Crawl
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Bytespider
ByteDance
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Meta-ExternalAgent
Meta
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Applebot-Extended
Apple
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Amazonbot
Amazon
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
DuckAssistBot
DuckDuckGo
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
Cohere-ai
Cohere
Allow
Allow
robots Allow
PHASE 2

Virtual user crawl test

1 probe returned non-200

Headless visits from a 🇺🇸 US IP and a 🇬🇧 GB IP confirm the site is reachable for real readers — and therefore reachable for AI crawlers that proxy through the same regions. This is a sanity check, not a deep audit.All checks OK — click to expand

🇺🇸USsuccess
Virtual user from US IP reaches the site cleanly via 301 redirect (www → canonical). No geo-block detected for general HTTPS clients.
301 HTTPblocked: false
🇬🇧GBsuccess
Bright Data Google SERP queries and Anthropic WebSearch from GB succeed on the homepage — the site is reachable from a real browser session. The block is bot-UA specific, not geographic.
200 HTTPblocked: false
What this test returns6 fields per country
{
  "countryCode": "US",
  "status":      "success",
  "blocked":     false,
  "statusCode":  200,
  "error":       "",
  "summary":     "✅ Accessible from US IP"
}
The 6 fields
countryCodeISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country the test ran from
statusHigh-level outcome: success / failed / error
blockedWhether the site rejected the visitor (geo or anti-bot)
statusCodeHTTP status from the origin (e.g. 200, 403, 408)
errorError message if the fetch failed (otherwise empty)
summaryHuman-readable verdict
No HTML body, response time, headers, page title, or redirect chain — just the verdict.
PHASE 3

LLM web-search access

2 reachable · 2 not reachable

For each AI model, we asked the model's own web-search tool to fetch the site. We log whether it succeeded and which other domains the model surfaced alongside yours — those co-cited sources are the competition for attention in answers about your category.

Provider
Model
Status
Co-cited sources
Notes
OpenAI (gpt-5.4)
gpt-5.4
Not reachable
none — fetched directly
PARTIAL. GPT-5.4 sets the fetched flag but cited NO source for betbrain.com. The model returned a plausible BetBrain-style description ('Trusted by Bettors, Powered by Precision...odds, live scores, predictions, betting tips, free bets, casino offers') with zero citations — strongly suggesting the fetch failed and the model filled from prior knowledge or SERP snippet. The phase 3 bot-impersonation data confirms this: gptbot, chatgpt-user and oai-searchbot all 408-timeout at the edge.
Anthropic (claude-sonnet-4-6)
claude-sonnet-4-6
Not reachable
none — fetched directly
BLOCKED via the model's native web tool. Claude reported 'The URL could not be accessed — the tool returned an error indicating the site may be down, the URL may be incorrect, or there are network/connectivity issues.' Curiously the phase-3 ClaudeBot/Claude-User/Claude-SearchBot ALL fetch successfully (HTTP 200) — so the block here is at Anthropic's web-search infrastructure layer, not the publisher's edge. Implication: when buyers ask Claude about BetBrain, Claude can't fetch the live site.
Google (gemini-3.1-flash-lite-preview)
gemini-3.1-flash-lite-preview
Reachable
betbrain.com
ACCESSIBLE. Gemini fetched the homepage and returned an accurate summary ('long-standing odds comparison platform that provides real-time betting odds, sports predictions, and information on casino bonuses and free bets'). This is the one bright spot: Gemini's native fetcher reaches BetBrain. But Googlebot itself is 408-blocked in phase 3, so Google Search and AI Overviews continue to index from stale prior crawls — which is why BetBrain is absent from the 10 Google SERPs run in this session.
Perplexity (sonar)
sonar
Reachable
betbrain.comzoominfo.comsimilarweb.complay.google.com
ACCESSIBLE on the brand-recognition prompt. Perplexity fetched the homepage but the 3 co-cited sources tell the real story: zoominfo (company data broker), similarweb (competitor comparisons), Google Play (mobile app listing). Perplexity is reaching for third-party intel about BetBrain rather than BetBrain's own deep pages — because in phase 3 PerplexityBot 408-times-out at the edge, so the index has only the homepage and external profiles. On the 10 buyer-intent prompts run in section 02, Perplexity-class searches never surfaced BetBrain at all.
PHASE 4

Bot impersonation test

5 critical bots inaccessible

We sent requests using each bot's exact User-Agent string. This catches edge-case blocks at the WAF / Cloudflare / CDN layer that robots.txt doesn't reveal — and surfaces response-time outliers that quietly push crawlers past their abandon threshold.

Bot
Status
HTTP
Response time
gptbot
blocked
408
27,200ms (timeout)
chatgpt-user
blocked
408
26,600ms (timeout)
oai-searchbot
blocked
408
29,100ms (timeout)
chatgpt-agent
blocked
408
27,600ms (timeout)
perplexitybot
blocked
408
29,100ms (timeout)
perplexity-user
blocked
408
28,600ms (timeout)
googlebot
blocked
408
30,400ms (timeout)
googlebot-smartphone
blocked
408
30,400ms (timeout)
bingbot
accessible
200
24,100ms⚠️
bing-copilot
blocked
301
4,300ms
claudebot
accessible
200
35,100ms⚠️
claude-user
accessible
200
26,000ms⚠️
claude-searchbot
accessible
200
32,400ms⚠️
grok
blocked
301
4,900ms
deepseek
blocked
301
8,300ms
Patterns to investigate: Review any blocked or slow bots above — bots responding in 10s+ are likely truncating or skipping your pages even when the HTTP says 200. Most LLM crawlers abandon at 3–5s. Note: we don't yet know if these are real production issues; they require deeper infrastructure investigation to confirm.
PHASE 5

Indexability · token depth

4 of 5 pages at risk

Pages over 10K tokens start to risk truncation; over 50K is a strong concern. Bloated rendered HTML — chrome, scripts, third-party widgets — pushes your real content past every model's effective context window.

Page
10K50K100K
Tokens
Status
Homepage
https://www.betbrain.com/
12.8K
At risk
About BetBrain
https://www.betbrain.com/about-betbrain
3.2K
Healthy
Premier League odds
https://www.betbrain.com/football-betting-odds/england/premier-league
21.5K
At risk
Casino bonus
https://www.betbrain.com/casino-bonus
18.9K
At risk
Tennis odds
https://www.betbrain.com/tennis-odds
14.2K
At risk
Why these pages are heavy4 explanations
Homepage · https://www.betbrain.com/
12.8K tokens — middling content depth for an aggregator homepage. Heavy on odds tables, light on the descriptive copy that LLMs cite. OddsChecker and Oddspedia run ~20-30K tokens on their homepages with explainer sections that AI repeatedly cites in section 02.
Premier League odds · https://www.betbrain.com/football-betting-odds/england/premier-league
21.5K tokens — strong depth, and the scoring data agrees (rank 3 of 21, 2.7/10, behind only oddschecker and oddspedia by a hair). Content is solid; the bottleneck is upstream visibility, not page quality.
Casino bonus · https://www.betbrain.com/casino-bonus
18.9K tokens and it scores #1 of 22 in RankBee's leaderboard for the casino-bonus query set. But the page never surfaces in the Bright Data Google SERP for 'best casino welcome bonus comparison' (where Oddschecker, Racing Post, FreeBets and OLBG take the top spots) — again pointing to a distribution gap, not a content gap.
Tennis odds · https://www.betbrain.com/tennis-odds
14.2K tokens. Wins outright in the RankBee tennis scoring run (#1 of 21, 2.94/10, ahead of OddsPortal and Oddspedia) — proof that when the page IS in the comparative set, BetBrain content competes. The problem is it almost never makes it into that set in live AI answers.
04Sentiment Snapshot

Sentiment — what AI says about BetBrain to buyers

Across 50 cells (10 prompts × 5 engines) BetBrain is cited in 4 cells. Where the brand does surface, the tone is neutral-to-positive — capability-focused rather than critical. The dominant pattern is absence, not negative framing.

Bonus & free-bet hunting (prompts 7-8)
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Absent

Across 10 cells (2 prompts × 5 engines), BetBrain appears in 0 cells. Top competitors by citation count in this cluster: Oddschecker (7/10 cells), OLBG (6/10 cells), Racing Post (5/10 cells).

Vendor evaluation (prompts 1-3)
3 prompts · 12 model responses analysed
Neutral

Across 15 cells (3 prompts × 5 engines), BetBrain appears in 2 cells. Top competitors by citation count in this cluster: Oddschecker (12/15 cells), OddsPortal (12/15 cells), Oddspedia (8/15 cells). Direct measured quote (chatgpt): "Betbrain Coverage: Wide sports range including football, tennis, rugby, and eSports."

Match-level intent (prompts 4-6)
3 prompts · 12 model responses analysed
Neutral

Across 15 cells (3 prompts × 5 engines), BetBrain appears in 1 cell. Top competitors by citation count in this cluster: OddsPortal (11/15 cells), Oddschecker (10/15 cells), Covers (8/15 cells). Direct measured quote (chatgpt): "BetBrain Pros: Very comprehensive, tracks odds from over 100 bookmakers, offers historical odds charts."

Trust & methodology (prompts 9-10)
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Neutral

Across 10 cells (2 prompts × 5 engines), BetBrain appears in 1 cell. Top competitors by citation count in this cluster: Oddschecker (7/10 cells), OddsPortal (7/10 cells), Oddspedia (4/10 cells). Direct measured quote (chatgpt): "BetBrain Ownership : Independent aggregator."

Sentiment leaderboard

Share of voice across 10 prompts × 4 models
PosNeuAbs
1.
Oddschecker
9 · 1 · 0
2.
OddsPortal
7 · 1 · 2
3.
Covers
2 · 4 · 4
4.
bet365
2 · 4 · 4
5.
OLBG
2 · 2 · 6
6.
Oddspedia
1 · 5 · 4
7.
William Hill
1 · 5 · 4
8.
Paddy Power
1 · 4 · 5
9.
Reddit
0 · 8 · 2
10.
Punter2Pro
0 · 5 · 5
11.
BetBrainyou
0 · 3 · 7

Frequently asked

What is a GAIO Audit Report?

GAIO stands for Generative AI Optimization — getting your brand cited inside AI answers, not just ranked on a results page. The Deficit Report is RankBee's diagnostic: across leading AI engines (ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and Google AI Overviews) and a tailored prompt set, it shows which answers your brand is missing from, which competitors take the citation in your place, and the technical and content reasons why.

Who is this for?

Anyone whose audience now turns to ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity or Claude before making a decision. RankBee Audits are used by SaaS and B2B teams, e-commerce brands, agencies running client pitches, news and media publishers, political campaigns, and many others. If AI engines are part of how people discover, evaluate or talk about you, the audit is built for you.

How is this different from a traditional SEO audit?

A site can hold position 1 on Google and be completely absent from ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity answers for the same query — because the two systems use entirely different signals to decide what to surface. A traditional audit grades you on Google's signals — backlinks, keywords, Core Web Vitals. RankBee grades you on what large language models actually reason about: entities, attributes, answer-first structure, citation-worthiness, and crawlability through the bot stack AI assistants use today (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended and 20 more). Strong Google rankings don't automatically translate into AI citations, and that gap is what the audit measures.

How does the audit work?

Four sections, each grounded in real data. Crawlability runs five technical phases: robots.txt rules, virtual-user probes from your target geographies, live LLM web-search fetches, bot-impersonation against your CDN, and token-depth indexability. Rankings Matrix runs your buyer prompts against up to 5 AI engines and logs every citation, co-citation, and competitor mention. Content Scorecard simulates AI ranking at the page level — RankBee ingests competitor content, generates variations, and scores yours 1–10 on the attributes models actually reward. Sentiment Snapshot reads how engines describe you when they do mention you, clustered by audience intent. The Rankings Matrix also shows every buyer question your brand is missing from — and which competitor takes the citation in your place, across each of the five AI engines tested.

Where do the prompts come from?

RankBee discovers them for you. From just your brand name, domain, region and category, the platform generates and crawls thousands of AI prompts relevant to how real audiences ask about your space — then narrows them to the high-intent set that drives your visibility. You don't need to bring a keyword list, a competitor list, or hand-written prompts; the audit builds all of that automatically.

What does "invisible to AI" actually mean?

There are several distinct failure modes, and the audit isolates which ones are affecting you.

  • Uncrawlable. Your CDN blocks AI bots, or your rendered HTML buries the answer below their token budget, so models can't read your pages at all. This is the most common silent failure: robots.txt shows no restrictions, but a CDN-layer rule — often a default "Block AI Scrapers" toggle enabled without the site owner's knowledge — returns a 403 to every AI crawler before the request reaches your server. The audit runs bot-impersonation probes that replicate the exact request signature of GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot against your live CDN to catch this.
  • Crawlable but uncited. Bots can reach and read your pages, but your content doesn't signal the attributes AI models need to recommend you — so the engine cites a directory, a competitor, or Wikipedia instead. The Content Scorecard scores your pages against the content actually winning citations for your target queries, attribute by attribute, so you can see exactly what to fix.
  • Cited but mis-framed. You're mentioned, but the model describes you in ways that don't reflect your positioning — attributes your facts to a subsidiary domain, describes a product you no longer offer, or associates you with a framing you don't own. This typically means AI engines are pulling from inconsistent third-party sources. The Sentiment Snapshot classifies every mention and maps the source of the mis-framing.
  • Locked out of live retrieval. When a user asks ChatGPT, Perplexity or Gemini a question right now, the model attempts a live web fetch to retrieve up-to-date information before answering. Many sites pass robots.txt checks but fail at the CDN or render layer when a real-time fetch is attempted — so live retrieval silently fails and the model falls back to cached training data, or omits your brand entirely. The audit tests this end-to-end: OAI-SearchBot (OpenAI's live retrieval crawler, distinct from GPTBot) requires explicit permission and an accessible render layer — both are checked as part of Phase 3.
  • Excluded from training data. Your robots.txt and bot policies determine whether AI training crawlers — GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended, CCBot — are allowed to ingest your content for model training and refinement. The audit shows exactly which training and search bots are allowed, blocked, or partially restricted, so you can make a deliberate choice rather than an accidental one. For reference: Cloudflare's managed robots.txt and AI bot blocking documentation explains how CDN-level rules interact with and can override your robots.txt directives.
How long does it take, and what do I need to provide?

Onboarding takes a few minutes; the full audit is delivered within roughly 48 hours. All you provide is your brand name, website, primary region, language, and category — RankBee handles prompt discovery, competitor identification, crawlability testing and content scoring from there. Rankings and sentiment data continue to refresh inside your dashboard so you can track how the citation pattern evolves.

What happens after the report — does it fix the issues?

The audit diagnoses; remediation happens in the rest of the platform. Most teams use the RankBee Toolkit to rewrite and re-test pages themselves, or RankBee Consulting for a fully managed engagement. The report includes prioritised recommendations so you know exactly which pages and attributes to tackle first.

Can I share the report with my team and stakeholders?

Yes — audit reports are sharable by link so it's easy to align marketing, content, technical SEO and leadership around the same data, and to brief agencies or executives without recreating the analysis. Account owners can switch a report to team-private at any time from RankBee.

How do I get a full audit?
Full audits are available to RankBee subscribers. The sample reports on this page show the structure and depth you'll receive; a full audit expands the prompt set for a statistically robust read across multiple intent clusters and refreshes alongside your ongoing tracking. If you're not yet a subscriber, start a free trial or book a demo and we'll walk you through the right plan for your brand.
Closing the gap

BetBrain's pages already win the scoring comparison. The next 90 days are about *being seen* — at the edge, in third-party content, and in AI answer surfaces.

Three moves change the picture: (1) Open the WAF for OpenAI, Perplexity and Googlebot user-agents — robots.txt is already permissive, the edge is the breaking layer. (2) Rebuild /about-betbrain as an entity-anchor page (ownership disclosure, founding date 2000, methodology, named editorial team) to capture the high-intent 'is X trustworthy / independent' prompt class where BetBrain is currently 0/10. (3) Earn co-citation in the 6 third-party roundups AI keeps quoting (Similarweb competitor pages, Punter2Pro, Mike Cruickshank, OLBG, BettingSites.co.uk, Reddit r/algobetting) — those six sources together dominate the 'best odds comparison site' and 'Oddschecker alternatives' SERPs.

Prepared by RankBee·rankbee.ai·gaio-1779258307280-d6x43hy03