Public sample

AI Visibility and Tech Audit for
Oddsscanner (UK)

10 UK buyer prompts x 5 AI engines (50 cells, MEASURED via Bright Data + Anthropic direct), 5 content pages scored against live competitor URLs, 24-bot crawl matrix, and AI-fetch reachability across OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini and Perplexity — measured 20 May 2026.

Default visibility: public. Anyone with the link can read this report. Sign in to your RankBee account to make it private to your team.
OS
Oddsscanner (UK)
oddsscanner.com
Generated20 May 2026
Audit windowLast 14 days
Report IDRB-OS-UK-2026-05-20
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.

Content scorecard
SECTION 01
Where Oddsscanner's pages beat the field — and where editorial brands win

Five strategic pages scored against the live competitor pages AI engines actually pull from. Football and the homepage win their leaderboards outright. Best Betting Sites, Betting Offers and Horse Racing are buried in a 1.00/10 floor.

31%of 100
Rank #1, +0 vs leader
Rankings matrix
SECTION 02
10 UK buyer prompts x 5 AI engines

OddsChecker is the AI-recommended default for UK odds comparison (33/50 cells, every engine that responded). Oddsscanner is cited in 7 of 50 cells — all of them in the vendor-evaluation cluster. The brand is absent from every match-day football, race-day and free-bets cell, and Gemini's safety filters refused all 10 UK gambling prompts.

7%of 45 prompt × model cells
Rank #11 · 7% cited
Crawl & access
SECTION 03
AI crawlers can reach the site — but ClaudeBot times out

robots.txt allows every major AI agent. 14 of 15 fetcher impersonations succeed (Googlebot, PerplexityBot, ChatGPT-User, GPTBot all 200). ClaudeBot returns 408 (request timeout). Anthropic's web_fetch tool independently reports the site as unreachable.

5 / 5pages reachable
2 urgent
Sentiment leaderboard
SECTION 04
How AI engines talk about Oddsscanner vs. UK rivals

Oddsscanner is positively recommended on 3 of 10 prompts (all in vendor evaluation). OddsChecker is positive on 10/10. Bet365, William Hill, Paddy Power, Ladbrokes, Sky Bet and Betfair are each positive on 7 of 10 — UK bookmaker operators outrank odds-comparison aggregators across the match-day, race-day and offers clusters.

3of 4 clusters need attention
Mention-only
01Content Scorecard

Content scorecard

Five pages on oddsscanner.com scored 1-10 against the live competitor pages that AI engines pull from for each UK query. Homepage and Football lead their leaderboards. Best Betting Sites, Offers and Horse Racing land at the 1.00/10 floor while editorial UK brands (Racing Post,...

Page-by-page scoring
As % · 5 pages graded
31% your avg31% leader avg
Page
Your score
Leader
Δ
Homepage
https://oddsscanner.com/
49%
16%
https://www.oddschecker.com/us/soccer/premier-league
33%
Football odds hub
https://oddsscanner.com/football/
75%
13%
https://oddspedia.com/football/england/premier-league/odds
62%
Best Betting Sites
https://oddsscanner.com/best-betting-sites/
10%
19%
https://www.olbg.com/bookmakers.php
9%
Betting Offers
https://oddsscanner.com/betting-offers/
10%
17%
https://www.oddschecker.com/free-bets
7%
Horse Racing
https://oddsscanner.com/horse-racing/
10%
17%
https://www.racingpost.com/grand-national/odds/
7%

Content quality leaderboard

i
Weighted average across audited pages
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
Oddsscanner
31%
3.80
2.
GG.co.uk
25%
6.00
3.
Horseracing.net
24%
6.20
4.
Squawka
23%
5.80
5.
Racing Post
22%
5.00
6.
BetSelect
22%
5.60
7.
Independent
19%
6.20
8.
LiveScore
19%
6.00
9.
OLBG
16%
4.80
10.
Oddspedia
16%
5.00
02AI Rankings Matrix

Rankings matrix

10 UK buyer prompts run live on 20 May 2026 across ChatGPT, Gemini (Flash), Perplexity (Sonar), Claude (Sonnet 4.6) and Google AI Overviews. ChatGPT / Gemini / Perplexity / AIO via Bright Data SERP API; Claude via Anthropic API direct with web_search tool. 50 cells total. Each...

ChatGPT
GPT-5.4
0%you
vs 78% OddsChecker · -78 pp gap
Gemini
3.1 Flash Lite
0%you
vs 0% OddsChecker · +0 pp gap
Perplexity
Sonar
22%you
vs 44% OddsChecker · -22 pp gap
Claude
Sonnet 4.6
0%you
vs 78% OddsChecker · -78 pp gap
Google AI Overviews
Search Gen
11%you
vs 78% OddsChecker · -67 pp gap
AI coverage matrix
All 10 prompts shown
YouOddsChecker (leader)Bet365William HillPaddy Power
#
Prompt
ChatGPT
Gemini
Perplexity
Claude
Google AI Overviews
1
Vendor evaluation
Best odds comparison site UK 2026
2
Vendor evaluationBranded
Oddschecker vs OddsPortal vs Oddsscanner UK
3
Vendor evaluation
Top free odds comparison tools for UK punters
4
Match-day football
Best odds for Premier League this weekend UK
5
Match-day football
Compare UK bookmakers for tonight's football matches
6
Match-day football
Best football odds today UK accumulators
7
Race-day & festivals
Cheltenham Festival odds comparison UK
8
Race-day & festivals
Grand National best odds guaranteed UK
9
Offers & free bets
Best betting offers and free bets UK 2026
10
Offers & free bets
Best new customer welcome bonus UK bookmaker

AI Coverage Leaderboard

i
Across 45 prompt × model cells Branded prompts excluded
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
OddsChecker
56%
1.40
2.
Bet365
44%
1.30
3.
William Hill
33%
1.80
4.
Paddy Power
27%
1.42
5.
Coral
18%
2.00
6.
OddsPortal
16%
1.86
7.
Racing Post
16%
1.43
8.
Ladbrokes
13%
1.17
9.
Sky Bet
11%
2.20
10.
OLBG
11%
2.00
11.
Betfair
9%
2.00
12.
Squawka
9%
2.00
13.
Oddsscanner
7%
1.33
03AI Crawlability Audit

Crawl & access

Audit ID gaio-1779258308990-a7suwrtr6, run 20 May 2026. robots.txt allows every major AI agent including the full Anthropic, OpenAI, Perplexity and Google-Extended families. 14 of 15 bot impersonations succeed. The single failure is ClaudeBot returning 408 (request timeout) —...

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.All checks OK — click to expand

RiskLowCrawlers24Allowed24Blocked0Partial0
robots.txt200· 17 lines2026-05-20T06:25:17Z
🚨Key risks flagged
🛠
🔍
allowed!partialblocked
Bot
Provider
Role
Status
Rule applied
GPTBot
OpenAI
Training crawler
Allow
Explicitly allowed via User-Agent: *
ChatGPT-User
OpenAI
On-demand fetcher (ChatGPT browsing)
Allow
Allowed
OAI-SearchBot
OpenAI
Search index crawler
Allow
Allowed
ClaudeBot
Anthropic
Training crawler
Allow
Allowed in robots — but blocked at edge (408)
Claude-User
Anthropic
On-demand fetcher (Claude browsing)
Allow
Allowed
Claude-SearchBot
Anthropic
Search index crawler
Allow
Allowed
anthropic-ai
Anthropic
Legacy training crawler
Allow
Allowed
Google-Extended
Google
Gemini training opt-out token
Allow
Allowed (no opt-out signalled)
GoogleOther
Google
Misc Google fetchers
Allow
Allowed
PerplexityBot
Perplexity
Index crawler
Allow
Allowed
Perplexity-User
Perplexity
On-demand fetcher
Allow
Allowed
CCBot
Common Crawl
Open dataset crawler
Allow
Allowed
Bytespider
ByteDance
Doubao / TikTok search
Allow
Allowed
Meta-ExternalAgent
Meta
Llama training crawler
Allow
Allowed
Meta-ExternalFetcher
Meta
On-demand fetcher
Allow
Allowed
Applebot-Extended
Apple
Apple Intelligence training
Allow
Allowed
Amazonbot
Amazon
Alexa / Q training
Allow
Allowed
DuckAssistBot
DuckDuckGo
AI assistant crawler
Allow
Allowed
Diffbot
Diffbot
Knowledge graph crawler
Allow
Allowed
Omgilibot
Webz.io
Aggregator
Allow
Allowed
FriendlyCrawler
Webhose
Aggregator
Allow
Allowed
ImagesiftBot
Hive
Image crawler
Allow
Allowed
Cohere-ai
Cohere
Training crawler
Allow
Allowed
Timpibot
Timpi
Decentralised search
Allow
Allowed
PHASE 2

Virtual user crawl test

2 probes — 200 OK

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
Accessible from US residential IP — homepage returns 200, full HTML, no geo-redirect. (Note: live page does redirect to /us variant for US users at the application layer, but the root HTML is served.)
200 HTTPblocked: false
🇬🇧GBsuccess
Accessible from UK residential IP — primary target market, homepage title 'Oddsscanner > Best Betting Odds in the UK' confirms UK is the default locale.
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

3 reachable · 1 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
Reachable
none — fetched directly
Accessible. Returns the correct UK page title and a one-paragraph summary matching the live homepage. No co-citations needed — OpenAI fetched the page directly. This is the highest-value AI-fetch surface and it works.
Anthropic (Claude Sonnet 4.6)
claude-sonnet-4-6
Not reachable
none — fetched directly
BLOCKED. Claude's web_fetch tool reports the URL could not be accessed ('site appears to be down, unreachable, or blocked at the network level'). This matches the ClaudeBot 408 timeout in Phase 4. Effect: any Claude answer about Oddsscanner falls back to model memory or to whatever third-party page Claude can reach. Combined with self-retrieval evidence, Claude is the engine where Oddsscanner is most under-cited.
Google (Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite)
gemini-3.1-flash-lite-preview
Reachable
oddsscanner.com
Accessible. Gemini fetched the live page and returned the matching heading. Direct citation of oddsscanner.com — the cleanest signal in the audit. Gemini is the engine Oddsscanner can most reliably win citations on once the content gaps in Section 01 are closed.
Perplexity (Sonar)
sonar
Reachable
vodds.comoddsscanner.com/usoddsportal.comoddsscannergroup.comglassdoor.comcbinsights.com
Accessible but defaulted to the US locale ('Oddsscanner US') and co-cited a competitor (oddsportal.com), an employer-review site (glassdoor.com) and a competitive-intel page (cbinsights.com). This is the single most strategic finding: Perplexity will answer 'what is Oddsscanner' by pulling from oddsportal.com and Glassdoor before pulling from oddsscanner.com itself. The fetch is not the problem — the brand-page authority is.
PHASE 4

Bot impersonation test

1 critical bot 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
oai-searchbot
accessible
200
18,800ms⚠️
chatgpt-user
accessible
200
31,300ms⚠️
gptbot
accessible
200
26,500ms⚠️
chatgpt-agent
accessible
200
2,400ms
perplexitybot
accessible
200
20,300ms⚠️
perplexity-user
accessible
200
37,000ms⚠️
googlebot
accessible
200
2,400ms
googlebot-smartphone
accessible
200
2,400ms
bingbot
accessible
200
2,200ms
bing-copilot
accessible
200
2,200ms
claudebot
blocked
408
23,200ms (timeout)
claude-user
accessible
200
16,200ms⚠️
claude-searchbot
accessible
200
20,200ms⚠️
grok
accessible
200
2,600ms
deepseek
accessible
200
2,100ms
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

Majority of pages healthy

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://oddsscanner.com/
14.2K
At risk
Football odds hub
https://oddsscanner.com/football/
11.8K
At risk
Best Betting Sites
https://oddsscanner.com/best-betting-sites/
8.6K
Healthy
Betting Offers
https://oddsscanner.com/betting-offers/
9.3K
Healthy
Horse Racing
https://oddsscanner.com/horse-racing/
7.4K
Healthy
Why these pages are heavy2 explanations
Homepage · https://oddsscanner.com/
JS-rendered Next.js shell. Estimated 14k tokens including hydration payload — substantive content begins after navigation, hero carousel and sportsbook icon grid. Risk: AI fetchers reaching this URL through Anthropic's WAF-blocked path get the rendered HTML but with content depth that competes with editorial blogs running ~3-5k tokens of pure copy.
Football odds hub · https://oddsscanner.com/football/
Next.js shell similar to homepage. Despite the high token count this page wins Section 01 (rank 1/21, 7.54/10) — the content density is genuinely strong. Confirms RankBee's recommendation to clone this page's structure onto horse-racing and best-sites where content is currently thin.
04Sentiment Snapshot

Sentiment leaderboard

How AI engines actually described Oddsscanner versus UK rivals across 4 buyer clusters when prompted live on 20 May 2026. positive = recommended as an answer by at least one of ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude or AIO; neutral = mentioned-only; absent = no engine returned the brand....

Match-day football (3 prompts)
3 prompts · 12 model responses analysed
Absent

Measured: zero Oddsscanner citations in any of the 12 cells (3 prompts x 4 responding engines) for 'Premier League this weekend', 'tonight's football matches', and 'football accumulators'. This contradicts the Section 01 finding that the /football/ page wins its content leaderboard at 7.54/10 — confirming the bottleneck is link/co-citation authority, not page quality. The cluster is owned by UK bookmaker operator brands: OddsChecker 9 positive cells, Bet365 7, William Hill 7, Paddy Power 6, Ladbrokes 6, Sky Bet 6. AI engines route match-day football queries straight to bookmaker odds pages plus OddsChecker as the comparison wrapper — they do not surface Oddsscanner.

Race-day & festivals (2 prompts)
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Absent

Measured: Oddsscanner is absent in all 8 cells (2 prompts x 4 responding engines) on Cheltenham Festival and Grand National BOG. Racing Post and Bet365 each lead with 7 positive cells, OddsChecker 6, Coral 6, William Hill 5. The Section 01 horse-racing page scoring 1.00/10 is the upstream cause — no Cheltenham/Grand National subsection, no Best Odds Guaranteed bookmaker table, no each-way fraction examples. AI engines route race-day intent through Racing Post + bookmakers because Racing Post structures the data the prompts ask for. For a UK-focused odds-comparison brand, being absent on the two biggest UK racing festivals is the single highest-cost gap in the audit.

Offers & free bets (2 prompts)
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Absent

Measured: also absent across all 8 cells. OddsChecker leads with 6 positive cells, then Sky Bet 5, Bet365 5, Racing Post 4, Paddy Power 4, BetMGM 3. Section 01 betting-offers page scoring 1.00/10 confirms the pattern: OddsChecker dominates because its offer cards have an extractable T&C bullet grid (qualifying stake, min odds, expiry, wagering); Oddsscanner's page is editorial prose without that grid. The behavioural difference vs race-day is that this cluster is fragmented (top vendor has only 6/8 cells) — meaning a credible Offers page could realistically take a meaningful slice without needing to overtake any single dominant competitor.

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

Measured: across the three vendor-evaluation prompts (Best odds comparison site UK, Oddschecker vs OddsPortal vs Oddsscanner UK, Top free odds comparison tools UK), Oddsscanner picks up 7 positive cells (out of the 12 cells from the four responding engines) — the brand's entire footprint in the audit sits in this cluster. The strongest signal is P2 (the direct comparison prompt): ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude and AIO all four cite Oddsscanner alongside OddsChecker and OddsPortal — measured quote from AIO: 'Summary Comparison Feature Oddschecker OddsPortal Oddsscanner UK Best For UK casual punters & Horse Racing / Sharp bettors & historical data / Value betting & beginners'. Measured Perplexity quote on P1: 'For the UK in 2026, the strongest odds comparison sites are Oddschecker, Oddspedia, and Oddsscanner.' OddsChecker still leads with 11 positive citations across the cluster vs Oddsscanner's 7.

Sentiment leaderboard

Share of voice across 10 prompts × 4 models
PosNeuAbs
1.
OddsChecker
10 · 0 · 0
2.
Betfair
7 · 1 · 2
3.
Bet365
7 · 0 · 3
4.
William Hill
7 · 0 · 3
5.
Paddy Power
7 · 0 · 3
6.
Ladbrokes
7 · 0 · 3
7.
Sky Bet
7 · 0 · 3
8.
OddsPortal
5 · 0 · 5
9.
Racing Post
5 · 0 · 5
10.
Coral
5 · 0 · 5
11.
OLBG
4 · 0 · 6
12.
Oddsscanneryou
3 · 0 · 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.
RankBee · Generative AI Indexing Optimisation

Oddsscanner already wins its football page. RankBee can map exactly which UK prompts need to follow — and what to publish to take them.

This audit shows where Oddsscanner is invisible to AI engines on the highest-intent UK queries — Cheltenham, Grand National, best UK betting sites, free bets — and what Racing Post, OddsChecker and OLBG are doing on those pages that's getting them cited instead. RankBee runs this dashboard live, monthly, against every prompt your buyers actually ask.

Prepared by RankBee·rankbee.ai·RB-OS-UK-2026-05-20