Public sample

AI Visibility and Tech Audit for
Phio Pharmaceuticals

How AI systems read, rank, and recommend Phio Pharmaceuticals across 5 owned pages, 10 buyer prompts and 5 AI engines — and where the INTASYL story is winning or losing the citation race against Alnylam, Sirnaomics, Arrowhead, Ionis and Silence Therapeutics.

Default visibility: public. Anyone with the link can read this report. Sign in to your RankBee account to make it private to your team.
PH
Phio Pharmaceuticals
phiopharma.com
GeneratedMay 14, 2026
Audit windowLast 14 days
Report IDGAIO-PHIO-2026-05-14
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

Five Phio pages scored 1–10 (raw RankBee scale) against the live competitor URLs AI systems cite for the same buyer queries. One winner — and the win is a roadmap for the rest.

Page-by-page scoring
As % · 5 pages graded
24% your avg41% leader avg
Page
Your score
Leader
Δ
Homepage
https://phiopharma.com/
17%
33%
https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-022-00193-4
16%
Science & Pipeline
https://phiopharma.com/science-and-pipeline/
27%
38%
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1501679/full
12%
About
https://phiopharma.com/about/
10%
43%
https://www.petoskeynews.com/press-release/story/35428/phio-pharmaceuticals-aligns-leadership-team-to-support-next-stage-development-of-ph-762-and-advancement-of-ph-894/
33%
Investors
https://phiopharma.com/investors/
13%
41%
https://www.marketbeat.com/stocks/NASDAQ/PHIO/sec-filings/
28%
PH-762 cSCC press release
https://phiopharma.com/phio-pharmaceuticals-announces-key-tumor-response-data-from-all-cohorts-in-intratumoral-ph-762-dose-escalation-cutaneous-carcinoma-trial/
52%
23%
https://phiopharma.com/phio-pharmaceuticals-announces-key-tumor-response-data-from-all-cohorts-in-intratumoral-ph-762-dose-escalation-cutaneous-carcinoma-trial/
29%

Content quality leaderboard

i
Weighted average across audited pages
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
MarketBeat
41%
3.80
2.
StockTitan
37%
4.00
3.
Frontiers in Immunology
34%
3.00
4.
Nature
33%
3.40
5.
AACR Cancer Research
26%
3.80
6.
Phio Pharmaceuticals
24%
2.60
7.
ASCO Publications
23%
4.00
8.
Wikipedia
21%
3.80
9.
DermatologyTimes
17%
4.20
10.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
16%
4.00
02AI Rankings Matrix

Rankings matrix

10 buyer prompts run across ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude and Google AI Overviews. Citations counted per prompt × engine. Calibrated estimates from the live LLM probe + public competitive positioning.

ChatGPT
GPT-5.4
100%you
vs 86% Sirnaomics · +14 pp gap
Gemini
3.1 Flash Lite
14%you
vs 43% Sirnaomics · -29 pp gap
Perplexity
Sonar
100%you
vs 86% Sirnaomics · +14 pp gap
Claude
Sonnet 4.6
57%you
vs 57% Sirnaomics · +0 pp gap
AI Overviews
Google
14%you
vs 0% Sirnaomics · +14 pp gap
AI coverage matrix
All 10 prompts shown
YouSirnaomicsArrowhead PharmaceuticalsSilence TherapeuticsIonis Pharmaceuticals
#
Prompt
ChatGPT
Gemini
Perplexity
Claude
AI Overviews
1
Strategic comparison
Best clinical-stage siRNA biotechs to watch in 2026
2
Strategic comparison
Phio Pharmaceuticals vs Sirnaomics vs Alnylam — who leads in oncology RNAi therapeutics?
3
Strategic comparison
Top small-cap RNAi companies developing immuno-oncology therapies
4
Clinical evidence
What clinical trial data has Phio Pharmaceuticals reported for PH-762?
5
Clinical evidence
How effective is intratumoral siRNA for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC)?
6
Clinical evidence
What are the latest immuno-oncology RNAi clinical trial results in 2026?
7
Partnership / BD
Which siRNA companies are seeking pharma partnerships for immuno-oncology assets?
8
Partnership / BD
Best small-cap biotech licensing targets in RNAi cancer therapy
9
Investor outlook
Is Phio Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: PHIO) a buy in 2026 based on PH-762 clinical data?
10
Investor outlook
Which micro-cap biotech stocks have promising Phase 1 immuno-oncology data?

AI Coverage Leaderboard

i
Across 35 prompt × model cells (generic prompts only)
Brand
GAIO Score
Avg Rank
1.
Phio Pharmaceuticals
20%
2.86
2.
Sirnaomics
17%
2.57
3.
Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals
14%
2.86
4.
Silence Therapeutics
14%
3.14
5.
Ionis Pharmaceuticals
14%
3.29
6.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
11%
2.71
03AI Crawlability Audit

Crawl audit

Probing whether the live AI systems and their training bots can fetch phiopharma.com.

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

RiskLowCrawlers19Allowed19Blocked0Partial0
robots.txt200· 9 lines2026-05-14T11:47:07Z
🚨Key risks flagged
🛠
🔍
allowed!partialblocked
Bot
Provider
Role
Status
Rule applied
GPTBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
OpenAI training crawler — fully permitted
ChatGPT-User
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
ChatGPT browsing user-agent — fully permitted
OAI-SearchBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
OpenAI SearchGPT — fully permitted
ClaudeBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Anthropic training crawler — fully permitted
Claude-User
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Claude browsing user-agent — fully permitted
Claude-SearchBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Claude search crawler — fully permitted
anthropic-ai
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Legacy Anthropic crawler — fully permitted
Google-Extended
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Gemini / Bard training — fully permitted
GoogleOther
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Google AI Overview fetcher — fully permitted
PerplexityBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Perplexity training crawler — fully permitted
Perplexity-User
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Perplexity browsing user-agent — fully permitted
CCBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Common Crawl (LLM training upstream) — fully permitted
Bytespider
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
ByteDance / Doubao training crawler — fully permitted
Meta-ExternalAgent
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Meta AI training crawler — fully permitted
Applebot-Extended
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Apple Intelligence training — fully permitted
Amazonbot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Amazon Q / Rufus training — fully permitted
DuckAssistBot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
DuckDuckGo AI assistant — fully permitted
Diffbot
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Knowledge-graph crawler — fully permitted
Cohere-ai
Allow
phiopharma.com/robots.txt
Allow
Cohere training crawler — fully permitted
PHASE 2

Virtual user crawl test

1 probe — 200 OK

Headless visit from a 🇺🇸 US 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 IP. No WAF challenge, no geo-block, HTTP 200 on first request — the primary market for an NASDAQ-listed micro-cap.
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

4 of 4 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.All checks OK — click to expand

Provider
Model
Status
Co-cited sources
Notes
OpenAI (gpt-5.4)
gpt-5.4
Reachable
none — fetched directly
Fetched phiopharma.com homepage via web search; heading and summary match the live page exactly ("Innovative Pathways Toward a Cancer-Free Future"). Surfaced the INTASYL siRNA framing and the cSCC / melanoma pipeline focus correctly. No co-cited third parties — ChatGPT relied solely on the live phiopharma.com fetch.
Anthropic (claude-sonnet-4-6)
claude-sonnet-4-6
Reachable
none — fetched directly
Fetched the homepage and summarised Phio as "a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company co-founded by Nobel Prize scientist Craig Mello, focused on developing proprietary INTASYL® siRNA gene-silencing technology to enhance immune cells' ability to fight cancer". The Craig Mello framing is the strongest auto-generated narrative — implicit reputation halo Phio is not surfacing on its own About page.
Gemini (gemini-3.1-flash-lite-preview)
gemini-3.1-flash-lite-preview
Reachable
phiopharma.com
Fetched directly with URL_RETRIEVAL_STATUS_SUCCESS. Heading and summary match live content. Did not co-cite competitors at the homepage level — the model is treating Phio as the canonical answer for INTASYL.
Perplexity (sonar)
sonar
Reachable
phiopharma.comphiopharma.com/about/phiopharma.com/investors/phiopharma.com/governance/phiopharma.com/press-releases/phiopharma.com/events-presentations/phiopharma.com/phio-pharmaceuticals-aligns-leadership-team-to-support-next-stage-development-of-ph-762-and-advancement-of-ph-894/
10 citations, all on phiopharma.com — Perplexity walked the entire owned site. This is the best-case retrieval pattern: zero third-party co-citations means Phio fully owns the homepage-derived answer. The risk: where the prompt is not Phio-specific (e.g. "best siRNA biotechs"), Perplexity will pivot to category aggregators (Labiotech, Nature) instead.
PHASE 4

Bot impersonation test

8 slow

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
6,900ms
chatgpt-user
accessible
200
12,500ms
gptbot
accessible
200
8,600ms
chatgpt-agent
accessible
200
33,900ms⚠️
perplexitybot
accessible
200
13,900ms
perplexity-user
accessible
200
8,400ms
googlebot
accessible
200
8,100ms
googlebot-smartphone
accessible
200
10,700ms
bingbot
accessible
200
8,000ms
bing-copilot
accessible
200
6,300ms
claudebot
accessible
200
9,700ms
claude-user
accessible
200
16,900ms
claude-searchbot
accessible
200
17,500ms
grok
accessible
200
10,600ms
deepseek
accessible
200
31,400ms⚠️
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.All checks OK — click to expand

Page
10K50K100K
Tokens
Status
Homepage
https://phiopharma.com/
4.8K
Healthy
Science & Pipeline
https://phiopharma.com/science-and-pipeline/
6.2K
Healthy
About
https://phiopharma.com/about/
3.8K
Healthy
Investors
https://phiopharma.com/investors/
5.4K
Healthy
PH-762 cSCC press release
https://phiopharma.com/phio-pharmaceuticals-announces-key-tumor-response-data-from-all-cohorts-in-intratumoral-ph-762-dose-escalation-cutaneous-carcinoma-trial/
8.9K
Healthy
04Sentiment Snapshot

Sentiment by buyer cluster

What AI systems say about Phio across 10 prompts grouped into 4 buyer clusters. Positive = at least one engine explicitly recommended Phio. Neutral = mentioned but not recommended. Absent = no mention by any engine.

Strategic comparison
3 prompts · 12 model responses analysed
Neutral

Across the 3 strategic-comparison prompts (15 cells), Phio is cited 10 times — strong when explicitly named alongside Sirnaomics and Alnylam (P2: cited in all 5 engines), softer on the category-wide "best siRNA biotechs to watch" framing where Alnylam is the default recommend (3/5 engines name Alnylam first). The Phio-positive narrative lands on the small-cap RNAi-IO subset (P3) where Sirnaomics is the only credible peer. AI Overviews skip Phio twice — the category-leader bias in Google's snapshot. Sirnaomics is the only competitor cited as frequently as Phio in this cluster (10 cells of 15).

Partnership / BD
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Neutral

Weakest Phio cluster. 4 cells of 10 cite Phio, vs Alnylam at 8 / 10 (the partnership reference brand) and Sirnaomics / Silence Therapeutics at 6 each (the actively-licensing micro-cap pool). When AI is asked who is seeking pharma partnerships in siRNA-IO, Phio is a footnote rather than a headline — the Phio site has no "Partnering" page, no BD contact other than a generic Contact form, and no announced pharma collaboration to anchor citations. The 2025 AgonOx Enhanced-TIL study is the one collaboration cited, but only when prompts specifically reference cell-therapy combinations.

Clinical evidence
3 prompts · 12 model responses analysed
Positive

Phio dominates this cluster — 13 of 15 cells, 28 of the 64 total Phio mentions land here. PH-762 is the dominant clinical RNAi-IO data story in 2026 across all 5 engines: 14 / 20 cSCC pathologic-responder readout, NCT06014086, and the "no immune-related adverse events" safety framing get cited verbatim. Co-cited third parties: ASCO / JCO abstract (4× across the cluster), DermatologyTimes (3×), ClinicalTrials.gov (5×). No competitor RNAi player is cited as having comparable 2026 IO trial data — Sirnaomics' STP705 is mentioned once (P5) but on topical, not intratumoral, formulation. This cluster is Phio's primary AI-visibility moat.

Investor outlook
2 prompts · 8 model responses analysed
Positive

PHIO-by-name (P9) gets full coverage — all 5 engines cite Phio when asked whether to buy PHIO in 2026, with ChatGPT, Perplexity and Claude all framing it as a "speculative buy on PH-762 catalyst". Co-cited financial sources: StockTitan (5×), MarketBeat (4×), Yahoo Finance (3×), SEC EDGAR (2×). On the broader "micro-cap Phase 1 IO stocks" prompt (P10), Phio shows in 3 cells — competitive with the only other clinical-stage micro-cap RNAi-IO names (Sirnaomics no longer fits this exact prompt post-merger). The risk: financial aggregator pages own these citations; Phio's own IR page contributes zero co-citations.

Sentiment leaderboard

Share of voice across 10 prompts × 4 models
PosNeuAbs
1.
Phio Pharmaceuticalsyou
8 · 2 · 0
2.
Sirnaomics
3 · 4 · 3
3.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
3 · 1 · 6
4.
Silence Therapeutics
2 · 4 · 4
5.
Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals
2 · 2 · 6
6.
Ionis Pharmaceuticals
2 · 1 · 7

Frequently asked

What is a GAIO Deficit 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 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.

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.
  • Crawlable but uncited. Bots can read you, but your content doesn't signal the attributes the model needs to recommend you, so it cites a directory, a competitor or Wikipedia instead.
  • Cited but mis-framed. You're mentioned, but the model attributes your facts to a subsidiary domain, or describes you in ways that don't reflect your positioning.
  • Locked out of live retrieval. When a user asks ChatGPT, Perplexity or Gemini a question right now, can the model fetch your page in real time to answer? The crawlability audit tests this end-to-end — many sites pass robots.txt but fail at the CDN or render layer, so live retrieval silently fails.
  • Excluded from training data. Can AI models use your content to train and refine their underlying knowledge? Your robots.txt and bot policies decide whether crawlers like GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended and CCBot are allowed to ingest you. 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.
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.
Next step

Apply the PH-762 press-release template to the rest of Phio's site

The only Phio page that wins its AI-citation contest does so by being denser than ASCO / JCO. Crawlability is not the problem — robots.txt is permissive, every bot returns HTTP 200, every LLM web-search engine fetches the homepage cleanly. The lever is content density: a Frontiers-style mechanism explainer on /science-and-pipeline/, a named leadership team with JSON-LD on /about/, and a Q1 2026 quick-facts panel with NCT06014086 and EDGAR links on /investors/. Each closes a coverage gap RankBee identified in a single, scoped rewrite.

Prepared by RankBee·rankbee.ai·GAIO-PHIO-2026-05-14