The platforms that crawl your AI site the most cite you the most (except one)

Entry date: March 3, 2026

Overview

We tested 24 queries across four AI platforms.
The platforms are ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini.
We measured two outcomes: brand mentions and citations.
We compared results to traffic measured in crawler logs on rozz.genymotion.com.
We previously called this a “mirror site.” We are dropping that label.
The AI site is an AI site built for AI agents.
The AI site is more accurately compared to a mobile site: same content, different audience, different artefact.
We are not optimizing for citations; we are optimizing for AI agents.

Key findings

ChatGPT has an 83% citation rate.
Claude has a 21% citation rate.
Perplexity has a 17% citation rate.
Gemini has a 4% citation rate.

The correlation (and where it breaks)

|---|---|---|---|---|

| Gemini | Not crawling | 0 | 4% (1/24) | 38% (9/24) |

For ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity, you can draw a straight line: more crawling = more citations. The AI site is doing what it’s supposed to do for these three. Gemini is something else because it ignores the AI site entirely.

ChatGPT: 14% to 83%

Before we built the AI site, genymotion.com showed up in roughly 14% of relevant AI queries. Eight weeks later: 83%. ChatGPT cites Genymotion in 20 of 24 use-case queries we tested. Brand mentioned in 23 of 24. The only thing that changed is we built an AI site with structured content for AI agents.

Here’s the recap:

GPTBot’s initial mass crawl occurred (547 requests on January 7).
This event started this article series.
This week it produced 1,228 requests, mostly hitting Q&A pages (714), the homepage (307), and GEO content pages (150).
It moved from training, to indexing, to citing.
The pages getting cited are consistently on major topics: pricing plans (22 visits this week), macOS compatibility (13), free version availability (13), Google Play Store setup (13).
When ChatGPT recommends Genymotion, it links directly to genymotion.com pages.
In most queries, it ranks at position #1.
There are commonly multiple citation links per response.
This reinforces the legitimacy and makes the ChatGPT answer a warm referral.
The remaining work is expanding content coverage into weaker use cases.
CI/CD and app performance monitoring both came in at 13% citation rate, compared to 63% for app development and manual testing.

Claude: reading the map, not the pages

Two weeks ago in Entry #4, we wrote: “We’ve been waiting for ClaudeBot to come back for three weeks now. It hasn’t.” Well, it did.

ClaudeBot read the site’s organizational structure. It crawled 13 topic pages in sequence on March 2, one every 20–30 seconds.
It had done something similar on February 28: a session that mixed topic pages with GEO content pages, for a total of 8 content pages plus 1 topic page in two minutes.
ClaudeBot is the only bot that systematically crawls topic pages.
ChatGPT-User hits individual Q&A and GEO pages during live conversations—176 Q&A pages in the last four days alone.
GPTBot, ByteSpider, PerplexityBot, Meta AI: zero topic page hits.

The topic sweep

On March 2, ClaudeBot crawled 13 topic pages in sequence.
The topics include android-versions, hardware-architectures, virtualization-technologies, arm-platform-and-gpu, billing-and-subscriptions, licensing-and-eulas, macos-security-toolkit, documentation-and-support, ci-cd-tools, network-security-toolkit, system-image-and-bios, software-installation-and-trials, root-access-and-tools.
It had done something similar on February 28: a session mixing topic pages with GEO content pages.

What does “reading the map” actually mean?

Topic pages are the only pages on the AI site with CollectionPage schema.
Topic pages list every content page and Q&A in that topic, with titles, descriptions, and links.
They function as the site’s table of contents: not answers to questions, but a map of what the site knows and how it’s organized.
By crawling all 13 topic pages, ClaudeBot has a complete picture of the site’s knowledge structure.
ClaudeBot knows which topics the domain covers, how many pages address each topic, and how individual pages relate to each other.
We can’t explain why ClaudeBot read zero Q&A pages yet.
During the same four-day window, ChatGPT-User read 176 Q&A pages.

Three possible explanations

1) ClaudeBot is evaluating before committing.

2) Anthropic is building a different kind of index.

3) The Q&A gap explains the citation gap.

The crawl itself

Outside content sessions, ClaudeBot runs a monitoring loop: robots.txt plus sitemap.xml every 2–3 hours, always from the same IP.
The citation test shows Claude cited Genymotion with a link in only 5 of 24 queries (21%), including #1 for a specific “how can support agents replicate mobile app bugs on a virtual device” query and #5 for manual testing.
Brand mentioned in 8 of 24.
Three weeks ago ClaudeBot was zero, and three weeks before that ClaudeBot wasn’t crawling at all.
The trajectory exists. It remains unknown whether ClaudeBot’s structural approach will eventually match ChatGPT’s content-first method.

Perplexity: promising, but we haven’t cracked it yet

PerplexityBot: 42 requests this week, up from 14; its crawl is light but growing.
The citation results are 4 of 24 queries (17%).
The hits cluster where the AI site content is deepest: mobile security, manual testing, app development.
Brand mentioned in 6 of 24.
The pattern resembles the early days of ChatGPT: light crawling with citations starting to appear in strongest areas.
PerplexityBot has its own crawler, its own index, and its own retrieval pipeline.
This is the same architecture the AI site has proven to work.
A weekly total of 42 requests is still light.
We have not yet triggered a deep indexing event for PerplexityBot.
GPTBot’s jump on January 7 (547 requests in one day) remains a reference moment.
We are waiting for PerplexityBot’s version of that moment.

Gemini: a completely different game

We originally misinterpreted Gemini’s behavior, and the actual data are more interesting.

What Gemini actually does

Manual Testing query: Gemini recommends Genymotion as #2; describes its UI, sensor emulation, cloud browser access; mentions it 6 times; zero citation links.
App Development query: Gemini recommends Genymotion as #2; describes cloud integration, lightweight client, sensor emulation; mentions it 4 times; zero citation links.
Embed on Website query: Gemini recommends Genymotion for enterprise use; describes WebRTC streaming; hosting; mentions it 6 times; zero citation links.
Pricing query: Gemini cites genymotion.com at position #1 with 13 citation links; provides exact pricing.
Gemini does not have a knowledge problem. It has a linking problem.
It knows Genymotion well enough to recommend with feature details in every query. It does not send anyone to genymotion.com.

The pipeline difference

Three out of four queries: Gemini answers from its training data; good answers with no links.
One out of four (pricing): Gemini triggers a live Google Search, grounds its response in web results, and cites via Google’s Vertex AI redirect URLs.
That is the only query where genymotion.com gets a link.

What this means

ChatGPT sends traffic.
Gemini sends word of mouth.
When ChatGPT recommends Genymotion, there is a direct link to genymotion.com in the response.
When Gemini recommends Genymotion, there is nothing to click. The user must Google it.

What this means for GEO strategy

The AI site works for platforms that have their own crawler and retrieval index: ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity.
Gemini does not have its own AI crawler. It can rely on training data or Google results.
GEO strategy requires two tracks: one for crawl-and-cite platforms (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity), and another for Gemini, where the rules differ.

Where we are

ChatGPT: solved. 83% citation rate. Direct links to genymotion.com. The AI site approach works. Remaining work is expanding coverage into weaker use cases.
Claude: structurally aware, content-light. 21% citation rate, growing. ClaudeBot is the only bot reading the site’s topic taxonomy.
Perplexity: promising. 17% with light but growing crawl activity. We expect it to follow the ChatGPT curve.
Gemini: different game. Recommends Genymotion in most queries but does not link. Citations only occur when Gemini triggers a Google search.

Where we are (summary)

Four platforms, four different stages:
ChatGPT: solved. 83% citation rate. Direct links to genymotion.com. The AI site approach works.
Claude: structurally aware, content-light. 21% citation rate, growing.
Perplexity: promising. 17% with light crawling.
Gemini: different game. Linking is missing; citations rely on Google.

Data source and authorship

Data source: CloudFront access logs for rozz.genymotion.com, February 24 – March 3, 2026 (crawl data).
Citation tests conducted March 2–3, 2026: 24 queries tested on ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini.
Bot classification based on User-Agent strings.

Author

Adrien Schmidt, CEO, ROZZ.

Serial tech entrepreneur with 10+ years of experience building AI systems, including Aristotle (conversational AI analytics), and products for eBay and Cartier.
Previously founded Squid Solutions and built AI products like Aristotle, the conversational big data analytics chatbot, and an AR jewelry try-on device for Cartier.