How We Compared Slovak SEO and GEO Agencies for Digitalman.sk

Nobody promises you as much as a digital agency. First place on Google, revenue growth, recommendations from ChatGPT and international expansion. How much of that can a prospective client verify before paying the first invoice?

For our client Digitalman.sk, we used AmICited.com and Ahrefs to compare Slovak SEO and GEO agencies. We combined a one-time AI experiment with organic search, backlinks, website performance and public content evidence. This article documents the findings and the workflow: how we selected prompts, collected data and checked which conclusions the evidence supports. Different agencies lead different disciplines. A large content archive can coexist with poor performance; a small specialist website can attract substantial traffic; excellent client work can remain invisible on an agency’s own domain.

Snapshot date: 3 November 2026. This is a historical observation, not a live ranking. Every traffic figure described as Ahrefs traffic is a modelled estimate, not a reading of an agency’s Google Analytics account. The experiment targets Slovakia and Slovak prompts. This English article explains the same experiment; it does not represent a separate English-language AI test.

How we conducted the analysis for Digitalman.sk

The practical brief was to identify whom Digitalman competes with in search and AI answers, and what a buyer can verify about those suppliers. We began with questions, sources and comparison rules rather than a predetermined list of winners.

Tools and evidence used

MCP let us retrieve records directly and preserve the measurement configuration. It did not remove the need for editorial judgement. The same number can support a useful comparison or a misleading sales claim, which is why each evidence layer comes with an explanation of its limits.

What a buyer should take from the findings

For organic visibility on their own Slovak websites, ui42 and Visibility lead the main shortlist. For AI brand mentions, Visibility leads. For publicly inspectable SEO and business-result claims, Spotibo, ui42, Increaseo, Basta digital and SCR interactive deserve a closer reading. These are still supplier-published claims requiring verification, rather than independently audited results.

For international content, checking only a Slovak domain is insufficient. ui42 operates ui42.com; Visibility has visibility-digital.com; Spotibo has the international software product spotibo.com. Invelity and Dexfinity also attract traffic to English content. These are different business models, which should not be combined into a single invented agency score.

For technical discipline, the stored field metrics look favourable for ui42 and Digitalman, while Visibility has issues with loading, responsiveness and layout stability. Spotibo and Basta lack INP measurements in the available data. Missing INP prevents a full three-metric Core Web Vitals assessment. The export does not supply the field collection period or device, so these are diagnostic signals to recheck.

Method: three layers of evidence

AmICited supplied the exact prompt configurations, provider responses, extracted brands and cited sources. Ahrefs supplied Domain Rating, referring domains, organic keywords and estimated traffic for Slovakia and the world. A separate public-site observation retrieved homepages, robots.txt, XML sitemaps and at most two further HTML pages per domain.

Ahrefs batch queries used domain-and-subdomain scope, both protocols and average volume mode. Paid search is excluded. Ahrefs DR is a 0–100 proprietary metric; it is not interchangeable with AmICited authority scores on a different scale.

The 90-day interface is not a 90-day experiment

The interface window runs from 6 August to 3 November 2026. The prompts in this study were executed once on 3 November. Earlier zero points do not demonstrate that the agencies were previously invisible. No trend, growth or stability claim can be inferred from this experiment.

Of the 312 AI attempts, saved answer text is present for 104 ChatGPT responses, 72 AI Overviews responses and 103 AI Mode responses. An empty AI Overviews answer may reflect answer availability or collection; it is not automatically a negative judgement of every agency. The details also contain 104 supplemental Google Search results, which we exclude from the derived AI citation counts.

Which agencies AI mentions most often

The following chart uses brand mentions from the AmICited overview. A mention can occur without a citation of the agency’s website. These counts are not percentages of prompts and are not interchangeable with the number of answers citing the domain.

In the full report, Visibility has 4.9% share of voice, Digitalman 3.0% and ui42 2.6%. The denominator includes software and platform brands appearing in informational responses. This is not Slovak SEO services market share. We do not recalculate the remaining agency mentions and present the result as an official AmICited metric.

Digitalman records 31.7% prompt visibility, 44 mentions and an average position of 2.57. The 71 “missing prompts” indicate absence of the brand in this prompt selection, rather than 71 failed measurements. Average position when a brand appears says nothing about its coverage of all 104 questions.

A second perspective: which websites become AI sources?

For each prompt-provider pair, we count a host at most once, even if an answer cites several URLs from it. The maximum is 312. We match the exact host and its www variant; separate language domains are not silently merged. Visibility appears as a source in 57 AI answers, Digitalman in 43, SEOLINE and Spotibo in 31, ui42 in 30 and Adamovic SEO in 26.

An informative article can be cited even when the answer recommends a different agency. Conversely, an agency recommendation can rely on a third-party directory without citing the agency’s own domain. Both measures are useful, but they answer different questions.

AmICited · Digitalman · 104 prompts

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

AmICited · competitor comparison

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

The interface’s “Top domains in AI answers” panel uses its own aggregate, such as 74 for Visibility. Our table uses a deduplicated AI-only answer count, such as 57. We do not treat those as equivalent measurements.

ChatGPT, AI Overviews and AI Mode choose different sources

Source-answer counts differ substantially by provider. Visibility leads ChatGPT with 35, ui42 leads AI Overviews with 16, and Digitalman leads AI Mode with 16. These are cited domains, not necessarily supplier recommendations. Each provider has 104 attempts; AI Overviews also lacks saved text for 32 answers, making coverage essential to interpretation.

Intent changes the picture. Across 60 buyer questions (180 prompt-provider pairs), Visibility and Digitalman each appear in 35 cited answers. Across 40 short keywords (120 pairs), Visibility leads with 22, ui42 has 12 and Digitalman six. Prompt selection materially influences the result. An aggregate rank is not a universal property of an agency.

Use the denominators in the headings when comparing differently sized groups. We do not combine these into a score weighted by Google volume: a high-volume informational search need not be the most valuable supplier-selection question.

Why prompt selection changes the ranking

Digitalman performs better in the combined comparison than in the separate short SEO/GEO keyword set. Its second place therefore cannot automatically be read as second place among Slovak SEO specialists for every type of search. This is part of the finding: a poorly matched question set can create a misleading picture even when the measurements are accurate.

We compared the two existing AmICited tags with the same country, three AI providers and reporting window. No prompts were rerun; we filtered the original results. Four untagged legacy prompts are excluded from this tag-to-tag comparison.

Restricting the view to short phrases reduces Digitalman’s visibility by 24.2 percentage points and its share of mentions to approximately one third. Raw counts of 35 versus seven are insufficient because sample sizes differ, which is why percentages are included. Average position moves little, while the brand appears across substantially fewer questions.

How the agency ranking changes

Each cell shows brand mentions and rank within the same 20 Slovak agencies/professionals. Equal counts share a competition rank; subsequent ranks skip occupied places. Publisher/software control AmICited and foreign firms are excluded.

A supplier-selection question leads to different answers from “seo audit” or “content marketing”. An engine may recommend agencies for the former and explain a concept, citing an article, tool or Google documentation, for the latter. Neither tag is inherently the correct benchmark; it must match the research objective. The SEO/GEO-labelled tag also contains broader marketing phrases and is not a pure SEO supplier-selection test.

Does the word “digital” favour Digitalman?

The resemblance between a generic phrase such as “digital agency” and Digitalman’s name is a reasonable bias hypothesis. However, only five of the 104 saved prompts contain the case- and accent-normalised stem digit-: two in each tag and one legacy prompt. Examples include the exact Slovak inputs “digitálna agentúra”, “digitálna marketingová agentúra” and “Ktoré slovenské digitálne agentúry majú špecializovaný tím na SEO a GEO?”.

We also checked existing results after removing all five prompts. The share of AI answers citing digitalman.sk was virtually unchanged: 43/312, or 13.78%, versus 41/297, or 13.80%. This sensitivity check measures website citations, not brand mentions. It does not explain the causal difference between tags, but it does not support attributing the result to a large number of explicit “digital” words. Isolating wording would require repeated matched questions with and without the wording change.

For the next study, define the objective first: choosing an SEO supplier, visibility on expert topics, or choosing a broader digital agency. Build questions from customer needs, keep these groups separate and repeat the same wording. Download the tag comparison JSON or mention and rank CSV to inspect the results. Missing export values remain missing rather than becoming zeros.

Main comparison of the Slovak shortlist

Search and sort the table by the dimension relevant to your procurement. Alongside 20 Slovak agencies and professionals, we include one labelled publisher/software benchmark, AmICited.com. It is not another agency. The table includes agencies and individual professionals; a smaller team is not automatically a quality penalty. Webman and InstaPrePodnik are related brands of the same operator and should not be treated as independent supplier choices.

¹ Mentions come from the AmICited overview. A dash means no matching aggregate value was available; it is not replaced with zero. The older Adamovic SEO alias adamovicseo.sk is mapped to the verified domain seo-optimalizacia.eu. ² Cited-answer counts are derived from the 312 AI attempts. A zero here means the host was not found as a cited source in that inspected set. Different domains of one business are not silently consolidated.

Who earns the most Slovak organic traffic on their own website?

Globally, ui42.sk has 711 organic keywords, including 271 in the top three; Visibility has 1,044 and 488 respectively. That supports broad content reach. It does not mean every keyword represents a potential buyer of SEO services. Glossaries, tutorials and general marketing questions can account for substantial traffic.

Increaseo provides a useful counterexample: 27 discovered sitemap URLs and an estimated 2,839 Slovak visits. Adamovic SEO has 99 URLs and 2,285 visits. Content inventory size does not automatically defeat a smaller specialist. We do not turn visits-per-sitemap-URL into a universal efficiency score: sitemap coverage, page types and subdomain scope differ.

Digital marketing is broader than SEO. A creative or development agency with modest organic traffic can be excellent at its core service. When buying SEO specifically, however, asking how the supplier demonstrates its own claimed expertise is reasonable.

Authority and links: useful signals with clear limits

Within the main shortlist, ui42 has DR 61, Invelity 54, Visibility 53, Adamovic SEO and Madviso 50, and Basta digital 48. The largest referring-domain counts are Dexfinity 1,654, Visibility 1,474, Adamovic SEO 1,411, Invelity 1,342, ui42 1,317 and Basta 1,270. Digitalman has DR 26 and 594 referring domains.

DR is Ahrefs’ metric, not Google’s quality rating or a factual-accuracy check. Referring-domain count does not reveal whether links are editorial, relevant, live or paid. A link-building supplier should be able to explain actual placements, paid relationships and risks. Large counts alone do not establish a safe strategy.

For Digitalman, the actionable implication is to develop useful, citable expertise and relevant independent coverage. Replicating the size of a competitor’s glossary without a differentiated topic, distribution plan or commercial connection is not necessarily a route to qualified demand.

Are the websites technically as strong as the promises?

Core Web Vitals: real-user experience

Google’s Web Vitals guidance defines good thresholds of LCP at most 2,500 ms, INP at most 200 ms and CLS at most 0.1, assessed at the 75th percentile. A complete assessment requires all three metrics.

AmICited’s stored field data can be matched to 26 registry domains. Eleven have all three stored metrics in the good range, eight have at least one outside it, and seven have incomplete data. No suitable value is available for 148 domains. That does not mean 148 websites fail.

The labels classify the stored metric tuple, not today’s certification of an entire website. The export omits collection period and device. “homepage” and “origin_fallback” indicate proxy scopes: a value attached to a cited article may not have been measured on that article. We prefer the overview’s brand-level tuple where supplied; otherwise a stored homepage record, followed by the shortest source URL.

ui42: LCP 1,118 ms, INP 87 ms, CLS 0.01. This is a favourable combination of loading, responsiveness and stability. Digitalman: 2,485 ms, 60 ms and zero. Its LCP is only narrowly below the good threshold; a positive label should not conceal the limited margin.

Visibility: 2,923 ms, 544 ms and 0.17. All three are outside the good range; INP also exceeds the 500 ms poor threshold. A prospective technical SEO client can reasonably ask how the supplier has diagnosed this and what remediation is planned. It does not demonstrate the same issues on every client website.

iFocus: LCP 5,263 ms and CLS 0.27 suggest loading and stability issues, while INP is unavailable. Increaseo: CLS 0.14 is a specific weakness despite a good available LCP. Spotibo and Basta: missing INP prevents a complete verdict even where the remaining values look favourable.

PageSpeed and Lighthouse: what was actually measured

Digitalman has a completed mobile run from 3 November 2026 at 04:39 UTC: Performance 96, Accessibility 95, Best Practices 96 and SEO 100. Lab LCP is approximately 1,111 ms, TBT 191 ms and CLS 0.0226. Its difference from stored field LCP of 2,485 ms illustrates why lab and real-user values should not be mixed.

A fresh comparative PageSpeed batch could not be completed. The public endpoint returned an exhausted daily quota, and the Digitalman-bound AmICited audit rejected a competitor URL outside that tracked domain. We supply no invented competitor Lighthouse scores. This edition compares available stored field metrics, with the limitations above. Google explains lab versus field data and CrUX’s 28-day window.

Direct HTML observations

Of 174 homepages, 172 returned HTTP 200. Belak Marketing returned 503 with a maintenance title. The connection to mrdigitalstudio.sk failed. Those are time-limited observations requiring repetition before a supplier judgement.

We sampled at most three HTML pages per host, inspecting title, description, canonical, H1, language, hreflang and JSON-LD presence. A JSON-LD block does not prove valid schema; multiple H1 elements are not automatically an error; missing hreflang is not a defect on a monolingual site. A full technical audit would require broader coverage of templates, redirects, internal links, duplicates and rendered JavaScript.

Sitemaps: how much content is actually discoverable?

The public crawl read robots.txt, declared sitemaps and conventional sitemap.xml/sitemap_index.xml endpoints. Limits were 12 sitemap files and 50,000 unique URLs per host. “Within limit” means the discovered queue was exhausted; it is not a guarantee of every page on the website.

There were 158 processable inventories within the limits, ten partial inventories and six cases without a successfully retrieved XML inventory. Partial counts mean at least this many URLs. A failed retrieval does not establish that a sitemap does not exist.

Visibility has at least 2,730 URLs in the bounded crawl versus 3,033 in an older stored AmICited inventory. ui42 has 1,147 versus 1,203; Digitalman has 577 in both. Different capture times and coverage limits mean these differences do not prove content deletion.

Registry outliers require particular caution. BeCode reached the 50,000-URL limit, AmICited has at least 36,266, and Dataswans at least 5,893. Language versions, taxonomies and generated pages can dominate inventories. None of these counts independently proves high editorial output.

Freshness: substantive updates or changed timestamps?

Digitalman supplies lastmod on all 577 discovered URLs; 568 declare a modification within 30 days, with a median age of 1.7 days. Basta has 425 of 478 URLs in that interval, Invelity 319 of 985 and ROI index 195 of 1,770. Visibility has 48 in its partial inventory; Spotibo has five of 115.

This is a signal to investigate, not a count of new articles. Navigation changes, template updates and publishing-system behaviour can modify many timestamps together. The Digitalman and Basta figures do not prove hundreds of new expert articles in a month.

ui42 and seo-optimalizacia.eu do not supply lastmod in the retrieved sitemaps. That does not make their content stale. Conversely, an old archive’s median age is not automatically a problem: established definitions and case studies need not be rewritten monthly.

A stronger freshness check samples recent AI-search articles, verifies authorship, sources, material revisions and factual currency. A Google AI Mode tutorial has a different shelf life from an explanation of canonical tags. This dataset helps choose URLs for that work; it does not certify the substantive freshness of every article.

AmICited · sitemap vocabulary coverage

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

Which topics do the URL inventories emphasise?

Tokens are normalised without diacritics and counted at most once per URL. These are URLs containing a token, not repetitions in article text. Basic language codes and some common words are excluded; structural labels such as blog and glossary remain visible.

A GEO token can also occur in a client name or geographical term. Meanwhile, a real GEO service can live under /seo/. Counting GEO URLs is therefore not an expertise score.

Visibility · first visit, consent overlays visible

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

ui42 · SEO service

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

Agency reviews: evidence worth checking, and questions still open

Visibility: leading AI reach with a technical question

Visibility leads brand mentions at 72 and AI source answers at 57. Ahrefs estimates 12,638 Slovak visits and DR 53. Its SEO service and references provide material for a closer review of people and projects. The stored Web Vitals tuple is the technical weakness. It is a plausible candidate for a broad content and SEO programme; ask about template performance and how client outcomes differ from glossary readership.

ui42: strong own-site performance, but inspect the case-study discipline

ui42 leads the shortlist in estimated Slovak traffic and has favourable stored field metrics. Its SEO service page names clients and describes organic revenue growth, a more useful claim than unspecified ranking improvements. Not every ui42 case is SEO evidence: the Finax case concerns UX and redesign. Request a case matching your problem, the measurement source and its timeframe.

Spotibo: specialist positioning, price signals and an international product

Spotibo records 35 mentions and 31 cited answers with only 115 sitemap URLs. Its service page publishes indicative prices, while its references identify clients and business-result claims. This makes the offer easier to inspect, without independently auditing the numbers. Spotibo.com’s international tools have their own organic reach; that should not be presented as foreign agency leads. Missing INP remains a measurement gap.

Basta digital: enterprise scope and results involving several channels

Basta’s SEO and GEO page describes enterprise work, audits and training. Its Popradská coffee example combines SEO, UX and other acquisition channels. That is useful discussion material, but all resulting growth cannot be assigned to SEO. Twenty-five AI mentions, DR 48 and 1,270 referring domains establish an experienced web presence. Incomplete field metrics do not establish a full pass.

Increaseo: a small inventory with substantial Slovak traffic

Increaseo has an estimated 2,839 Slovak visits from an inventory of 27 URLs. Its references discuss users, transactions and revenue, while its technical sprint makes delivery more concrete. This can suit a buyer with a specific implementation problem. Percentage growth still needs a baseline and seasonal context. Stored CLS of 0.14 is a concrete question about the supplier’s own website.

SCR interactive: client international SEO differs from its own-domain reach

SCR’s SEO page describes results for clients including Exisport in Hungary and Farmove. These are client-work claims; its own domain has roughly 804 Slovak and 196 Czech estimated visits. Modest own-site reach outside SK/CZ does not disprove foreign client delivery. Ask for a contactable client reference and a clear account of what the agency actually implemented.

Dexfinity and Invelity: different international content footprints

Dexfinity leads the shortlist in referring domains and has 431 estimated visits outside SK/CZ. Its US keyword sample includes English glossary and marketing-tool subjects. Invelity has DR 54 and English articles about affiliate marketing, SEO and advertising. Both warrant distinguishing content readership from international SEO customer acquisition. A PPC case embedded on an SEO page does not become an SEO result.

SEOLINE and Adamovic SEO: smaller websites can support specialist authority

SEOLINE has 34 mentions, 31 cited answers and 32 sitemap URLs, including case-study and AI-service sections. Adamovic SEO has 29 mentions, 2,285 estimated Slovak visits, pricing and case studies. For both, inspect the responsible professional, capacity and delivery continuity. Adamovic’s old domain alias in the AI report also illustrates why entity resolution matters in GEO.

Gradeta and iMPROVE: process transparency is more useful than a GEO label

Gradeta explains SEO’s limits and relationship to AI optimisation; its references identify clients. iMPROVE separates visibility, sentiment and answer accuracy and describes auditing, content and monitoring. These are useful process signals. They still need repeatable before-and-after measurements and evidence of commercial benefit.

BeeSeo, ROI index, Webman and InstaPrePodnik

BeeSeo’s references include anonymised cases. There may be legitimate reasons for anonymity, but without a named client or verification route the evidence is weaker. ROI index has 1,770 sitemap URLs, with extensive glossary and AI topics; inventory size cannot replace case verification. Webman identifies its operator as InstaPrePodnik, s.r.o., so the two brands are not independent suppliers.

Digitalman: a sound technical starting point without inflated conclusions

Digitalman has 44 mentions and 43 cited AI answers, but only 492 estimated Slovak organic visits. AI visibility and organic traffic need not move together. Its mobile lab snapshot is favourable; field LCP has little headroom; widespread recent lastmod does not prove a large volume of newly researched content.

Digitalman’s references name clients, frequently across several channels. Its SEO page also cites general industry return-on-investment figures. An industry ROI statistic is not an achieved Digitalman client result. The strongest next step would be dedicated SEO and GEO case studies with baselines, dates, interventions and attribution limits.

Who demonstrates international organic reach?

³ World minus Slovakia minus Czechia is an approximate subtraction of independently rounded estimates; negative residuals are clamped to zero. Czech traffic is taken from the top-country export, so absence from that list does not establish absolute zero. Search country is not the same as content language or commercial intent.

Alternative domains change the comparison

ui42.com ranks third in the US sample for “what is keyword analysis” at an estimated volume of 500. Invelity ranks seventh for “seo optimisation techniques” at volume 100. Spotibo.com ranks first for “technical seo audit tool” at volume 1,400. These are more specific demonstrations of international reach than the presence of an English language switch.

The most substantiated candidates for further investigation of own-site international SEO are ui42 for its separate English domain, Invelity and Dexfinity for multilingual content, and Spotibo separately for software success. Visibility has substantial Czech reach and a smaller English website. None is declared the winner in international agency client acquisition: qualified foreign leads and revenue are unavailable.

Digitalman’s estimated 71 visits from Kyrgyzstan come from one keyword, “usp”. ui42.sk’s US sample includes Slovak-language queries. Basta’s Finnish keyword query returned no individual keywords despite traffic in the batch export. These discrepancies remain visible rather than being turned into unsupported expansion claims or accusations of supplier error.

AmICited.com: a domain under one year old that already ranks and earns AI citations

We include AmICited as a software benchmark from this article’s publisher, including in the main comparison table. Its performance provides a concrete example of a young domain earning organic positions and AI citations. It remains separate from Slovak agency winners, and its own results are not an independent client reference.

The Verisign RDAP registry records registration on 8 December 2025. On 3 November 2026, the domain was 330 calendar days old — not yet one year. This establishes registration age, not a verified product launch date or company age.

How many citations does Ahrefs show?

In Ahrefs Site Explorer, the AI responses / New index panel with All locations selected showed 786 AI responses and 440 cited pages. The precise measure is responses citing the domain, not a count of individual hyperlink occurrences.

Cited pages overlap across platforms, so their row totals must not be added to calculate unique URLs. Grok was labelled paused; its displayed zero is not interpreted as exhaustive evidence of no citations.

Ahrefs · AmICited · AI responses and organic growth

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

This is a different measurement from our Digitalman experiment. Ahrefs uses its own questions, countries and index. In our one-time Slovak experiment, amicited.com appeared as a source in five AI answers. Neither five nor 786 is an error: inputs, coverage and providers differ. The API connection did not include the required Brand Radar add-ons, so these new counts were read from the authenticated interface and documented in the screenshot.

The young domain’s own SEO performance

The original frozen Ahrefs export gives AmICited 1,930 estimated monthly organic visits worldwide, 307 from Slovakia, 370 organic keywords and 118 keywords in the top three. DR is 58, with 1,436 referring domains. Digitalman’s export records 569 worldwide visits, 492 Slovak visits and DR 26. Visibility has DR 53 and ui42 DR 61; AmICited does not match their Slovak organic traffic scale.

The current Ahrefs interface capture shows 363 unique keywords and 120 in the top three. The comparison tables retain the frozen API values of 370 and 118 rather than mixing the two snapshots. The by-location keyword report has 405 rows because one phrase can have records in several countries.

Specific examples from the US Ahrefs export, filtered to main organic positions:

Ahrefs · AmICited · international keyword positions

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

For a buyer, this is a concrete counterexample to the idea that a young website cannot compete. Age alone does not explain the outcome, and domain registration does not establish the experience, team or links available to the project. Positions and citations also do not establish qualified leads or ROI. The supporting records, including the platform breakdown, are available in a separate JSON export.

Which short keywords and prompts did we use?

The set contains 40 short Ahrefs-selected keywords, 60 buyer questions and four pre-existing prompts. All target Slovakia, use a one-time schedule and request ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode. The longer initial questions were supplemented with short phrases reflecting common search inputs.

The highest-volume selected phrases include “content marketing” at 5,000, “seo stratégia” and “seo cena” at 1,500 each, “off page seo” at 900, and “seo specialista” and “seo audit” at 800 each. “seo bratislava” has 700, “seo agentúra” 600, “seo služby” 450, “technické seo” 200, “ai seo” 150, “geo optimalizácia” 90 and “geo audit” ten.

These are Ahrefs estimates of average monthly Google searches in Slovakia when the keyword list was prepared, not ChatGPT query counts. Accented and unaccented variants may overlap in intent; their volumes are not added to invent a market-size figure. Relevant low-volume GEO terms were deliberately retained.

Short informational phrases also retrieve international tools and tutorials, so they are not a pure supplier-selection test. The buyer questions cover choosing an agency, prices, technical SEO, ecommerce, local services and AI visibility measurement. Future repeated research should report the two groups separately as well as in aggregate.

The prompts remain in Slovak. Translating them would change the experiment, rather than translate its documentation.

The complete Digitalman competitor registry

This is the complete frozen registry, not a list of 173 certified Slovak SEO professionals. It retains active and inactive entries, separate controls and candidates whose origin was not fully verified in this edition. A listed name is not an endorsement. Sort by mentions, citations, Slovak or global traffic, DR, referring domains or sitemap size to inspect different dimensions.

How to assess a supplier before signing

A named accountable professional.

Establish who designs strategy, who implements it and how much capacity is allocated.

A comparable client case.

Ask for the baseline, dates, agency contribution and a client verification route.

An audit connected to completed fixes.

A long PDF without priorities, owners and implementation checks is not an outcome.

Transparent GEO measurement.

Exact prompts, country, provider and cadence, with mentions, citations, visits and leads kept distinct.

Control over your accounts and history.

Agree access, ownership and handover terms before work starts.

Commercial results after costs.

Qualified leads, organic conversions and margin are more meaningful than article or mention counts alone.

Google explains that established SEO foundations remain relevant to AI Overviews and AI Mode and does not require special AI schema or a separate technical optimisation. A GEO proposal should specify work, measurement and limitations. Adding llms.txt or a new acronym to a price list does not demonstrate impact.

What Digitalman should do next

Technical SEO: performance and observed positions in AmICited

Digitalman should keep all three Core Web Vitals healthy: fast loading, responsive interactions and stable content. AmICited’s Performance Impact view compares source-page performance with positions observed in the tracked results. Blue highlights identify Digitalman; green, amber and red bands distinguish the quality of each metric.

The captures from 3 November 2026 include Google Search, Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT and Google AI Mode. This view includes conventional Google results, so its counts are not combined with our separate calculation across 312 AI attempts. The bars on the right show the metric-quality distribution of pages appearing in the top ten, not the probability that any fast website will earn a citation.

AmICited · LCP / positions

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

AmICited · INP / positions

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

AmICited · CLS / positions

Captured 3 Nov 2026 Visit source ↗

A substantial share of the displayed top-ten pages falls in the green bands. That supports prioritising a good user experience in practice; the charts alone do not establish that speed caused better positions or that every engine uses the same ranking signal. They describe selected sources without a control sample of all uncited pages. Google separately confirms that its systems consider Core Web Vitals and overall page experience; a good score alone does not guarantee first place. Source: Google Search Central.

For Digitalman, the technical priorities are concrete:

• Create more LCP headroom. The stored 2,485 ms sits narrowly below the 2,500 ms threshold. Identify the LCP element on the homepage, SEO/GEO service pages and frequently cited articles, then inspect critical images, fonts, blocking resources and caching. These are diagnostic checks, not confirmed causes of a problem.
• Preserve good INP and CLS through future changes. The current 60 ms and CLS of zero are favourable. When adding forms, analytics, widgets or templates, check interaction responsiveness, JavaScript work and reserved space for media and banners.
• Use FCP and TTFB as supporting diagnostics. They help distinguish server waiting from rendering delays, while remaining separate from the three Core Web Vitals: LCP, INP and CLS.
• Measure implementation and outcomes together. After changes, repeat a comparable mobile lab test and track subsequent field data, citations and positions against the same prompt sample. Record deployment dates and other interventions rather than automatically attributing a ranking change to performance.

Downloads and limitations

Download all 174 domains as CSV, the 104 prompts and volumes as CSV, or the complete derived benchmark as JSON. Both language editions use the same dataset.

This is not a representative survey of all buyers or every Slovak agency. We lack comparable quotes for one brief, internal capacity, retention, client margins and private analytics. We did not perform complete security, accessibility or JavaScript audits. Unverified candidates are not declared Slovak legal entities, and all 173 competitors are not presented as certified SEO/GEO specialists.

The screenshots capture the actual AmICited overview, competitor comparison, available URL-vocabulary coverage table and two agency websites. The first sitemap UI panel reported an error during capture; the displayed coverage table was available. Captures provide visual context; measured tables use the frozen exports. Fresh, comparable mobile PageSpeed tests across all agencies remain an unfinished measurement layer.