--- title: "LLM SEO Agencies 2026: 10 Firms Checked on AI Bot Access" description: "10 LLM SEO agencies for 2026, judged on AI crawler access, JavaScript rendering, llms.txt and log files, with how each measures results and what it costs." url: https://frontal.so/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies updated: 2026-11-05 --- Work with Frontal Want us to run this for you? Book a call and we’ll walk you through how we would make it work for you. [Book a call](https://book.frontal.so) Content # The 10 Best LLM SEO Agencies for Technical Teams in 2026 [Alex Vacca](https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-vacca) 27 min read Founder, Frontal Updated Nov 5, 2026 ## Key Takeaways - Pick Omnius to audit and open access for named AI crawlers, or DEJAN for per-bot crawl rules plus model memory. Pick Gray Dot Co or Screaming Frog for AI bot visits from your logs, or DoodleWeb for crawler upkeep from $1,200 a month. - In a December 2024 Vercel and MERJ study, none of the major AI crawlers rendered JavaScript, so check your raw HTML first. - Of the nine outside firms, only Gray Dot Co and Screaming Frog sell AI bot log analysis in full; only Omnius touches all four kinds. - Training drove 80% of AI crawling in the year before Cloudflare’s August 2025 post, so a training block and a search block are separate decisions. Fetch your pricing page with a plain HTTP request, which runs no JavaScript, and you see roughly what OpenAI’s GPTBot reads if no bot rule intervenes. We scored nine LLM SEO agencies on four kinds of work that shape that view: AI crawler access, JavaScript rendering, llms.txt and log-file analysis. Omnius, DEJAN, Gray Dot Co, Screaming Frog, Momentic and iPullRank are technical SEO firms; DoodleWeb, Quoleady and Qoulomb are content and web studios. We run the tenth firm, Frontal, the go-to-market partner for B2B tech companies, working as an extension of your team. LLM SEO here means getting a site reached, read and retrieved by AI systems, a narrower job than most [AI SEO agencies](https://frontal.so/blog/best-ai-seo-agencies) take on. We read each firm’s pages on November 5, 2026, and kept prices in their own currencies. ## What an AI Crawler Sees on Your Site Two things decide what an AI crawler gets from your site. One is what the HTML holds before any script runs; the other is what robots.txt says once your CDN adds its own rules. ### Most AI Crawlers Read Only the Raw HTML In December 2024, [a Vercel and MERJ study](https://vercel.com/blog/the-rise-of-the-ai-crawler) reported that “none of the major AI crawlers currently render JavaScript.” Vercel, a hosting company, drew the data from its own network. The bots covered included GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot, while Google’s Gemini rendered pages through Googlebot’s infrastructure. It’s a 2024 sample, so re-test with a live fetch. [Tech stack detection](https://frontal.so/plays/tech-stack-signal-detection) works because a site’s stack is public, so a firm can see whether your pages rely on client-side JavaScript before the first call. The same Vercel study found ChatGPT spent 34.82% of its fetches on 404 pages, against Googlebot’s 8.22%, so dead and moved URLs waste many of those visits. ### Crawl Rules Your CDN Can Add Without Telling You [Cloudflare’s documentation](https://developers.cloudflare.com/bots/additional-configurations/managed-robots-txt/) says its managed robots.txt is prepended to yours, “combining both into a single response.” One site owner described the result in [an r/SEO thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/SEO/comments/1srlq0o/cloudflare_has_been_quietly_blocking_gptbot_and/), a single Reddit anecdote. His robots.txt “explicitly allowed every AI crawler,” yet fetching the live file showed a block his CDN had added, disallowing GPTBot, ClaudeBot and Google-Extended. Replies disagree on whether the setting was on by default. Either way, audit the robots.txt your CDN serves. ## Retrieval Versus Training Data, Bot by Bot [Cloudflare’s crawl data](https://blog.cloudflare.com/crawlers-click-ai-bots-training/) counts pages crawled for each page a user clicks back to. In July 2025 that ratio was 38,065.7 for Anthropic and 1,091.4 for OpenAI. In those ratios the referred visit is the payoff, yet a visit won’t name the company behind it, a separate job for [visitor de-anonymization](https://frontal.so/plays/website-visitor-de-anonymization). Over the 12 months before Cloudflare’s August 2025 post, 80% of AI crawling was for training, 18% for search and 2% for user actions. OpenAI splits those three jobs across separate bots, and [its crawler documentation](https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/bots) says “Each setting is independent of the others.” | Bot (operator) | Job | What the operator’s own page says | | --- | --- | --- | | GPTBot (OpenAI) | Training | Crawls content that may train OpenAI’s models | | OAI-SearchBot (OpenAI) | ChatGPT search | Opted-out sites leave its search answers; navigational links can remain | | ChatGPT-User (OpenAI) | A user’s request | “robots.txt rules may not apply” | | ClaudeBot (Anthropic) | Training | Blocking it signals future content should stay out of training | | Claude-User (Anthropic) | A user’s request | Blocking it stops Claude retrieving pages for user queries | | PerplexityBot (Perplexity) | Perplexity search | Links sites in its search; not used to train foundation models | | Google-Extended (Google) | Gemini training and grounding | Has no effect on inclusion or ranking in Google Search | So a rule keeping GPTBot out of training leaves OAI-SearchBot free to index you for ChatGPT search, and the reverse. ### Blocking a Training Crawler Blocking GPTBot, ClaudeBot or Google-Extended asks each company to keep your future content out of model training. Search runs on other bots, and Google says Google-Extended “does not impact a site’s inclusion in Google Search.” What a model already learned stays, and training data reflects what’s written about you across the web, the off-site work [GEO agencies](https://frontal.so/blog/best-generative-engine-optimization-agencies) sell. Ask a firm whether its work targets training data or retrieval. ### Fetches a Person Asks For User-triggered fetches play by looser rules. OpenAI says robots.txt may not apply to ChatGPT-User, and Perplexity says Perplexity-User “generally ignores robots.txt rules.” In a small, anecdotal Reddit test [on r/SEO](https://www.reddit.com/r/SEO/comments/1x1no5q/made_secret_urls_to_see_which_ais_actually/), one tester gave each AI a secret URL behind a logging Cloudflare worker. ChatGPT’s first, user-triggered visit went straight to a disallowed page, and OAI-SearchBot read robots.txt about 76 seconds later. He calls it “a small test, few runs each, one day.” A run of user-triggered fetches on your pricing page is first-party evidence that people ask an assistant about you. Put it into practice Want us to run this for you? Book a call and we’ll walk you through how we would make it work for you. [Book a call](https://book.frontal.so) ![Kenny Damian, Head of GTM](https://frontal.so/images/blog/portraits/kenny-damian.webp) ## What an llms.txt File Can and Can’t Do Jeremy Howard, who proposed the file, expected llms.txt to be useful “for inference rather than training.” Agents read it on demand while helping a user, including research steps teams script with [Claude Code](https://frontal.so/blog/claude-code-for-gtm). Google’s AI optimization guide says that for Google Search you can ignore “creating unnecessary AI text files (like llms.txt).” Chrome’s [Lighthouse audit](https://developer.chrome.com/docs/lighthouse/agentic-browsing/llms-txt) does check for the file, but marks the audit “Not Applicable” when it’s missing, “as providing the file is optional at the moment.” That’s an audit, not a sign that any Google system reads the file. OpenAI, Anthropic and Perplexity say nothing either way on their crawler pages. Four of the nine outside firms sell llms.txt work (Omnius, DEJAN, DoodleWeb and Quoleady), so treat it as a small add-on. ## How We Scored Four Kinds of AI Access Work Each candidate recurs on pages ranking for this search or sells AI crawler work, and every fact comes from its own current pages. Search for LLM optimization agencies and some results tune or deploy models; we kept firms working on how AI systems read your site. A firm’s own pages set its group: technical SEO specialist, or LLM work sold through content, web builds or a GEO program. The four kinds we scored: 1. AI crawler access through robots.txt, CDN or firewall rules 2. JavaScript rendering for crawlers that don’t run scripts 3. An llms.txt file 4. Log-file analysis of AI crawlers Each kind sold with AI crawlers named earns a point. Work sold without naming AI crawlers, or seen only in a client case, earns half, as does AI crawler monitoring with no log source named. Blog advice and free tools don’t count. Within a group, scores run high to low. Ties go to the firm separating retrieval from training data, then to a stated measurement method, then to more published method. Numbers run through both groups, but neither ranks above the other. Frontal is tenth, last in its group, by our choice: it’s ours, and it sells none of the four kinds. ## LLM SEO Agencies Compared on AI Crawler Access The ten LLM SEO agencies compare like this. In the work column, a is crawler access, b JavaScript rendering, c llms.txt and d log-file analysis. | Agency | AI access work (of 4) | Retrieval or training data | Measurement as published | What its AI case figure counts | Price as published | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Omnius | 3.5: a, b, c, half d | Both | Unnamed own tool; citations, mentions, sentiment | AI-search clicks up 164.44%, May to September 2025 (ANNA Money) | No published rate | | DEJAN | 3: a, b, c | Both | Own AI Rank tool; monthly; hundreds of test queries | Share of brand mentions, 1.5% to 8.0%, March to July 2026 (OWAYO, consumer) | Audit AUD 5,000; retainer from AUD 5,000 a month | | Gray Dot Co | 3: a, b, d | Both | AI bot log analysis; prompt visibility and citation counts | No AI-search figure | No published rate | | Screaming Frog | 2: a, d | Both | Its own log file tool; GA4 AI referrals; prompt tracking | No AI-search figure | Day rate, figure not published | | Momentic | 1.5: a, half b | Both | Own Atlas tool; seven AI platforms plus Google, typically weekly | No AI-search figure for a client | No published rate; Atlas fee quoted per brand | | iPullRank | 1: half b, half d | Retrieval only | No tracker named; citations and AI referral traffic | AI Overview inclusions, 712 to 3,235 in a year (unnamed telecom) | No published rate | | DoodleWeb | 2: a, c | Not addressed | Own tracker; up to 20 or 100 questions tracked daily, by plan | GPTBot got the page, not a Cloudflare challenge, in 3 weeks (Gooten) | Core $1,200 a month; Custom from $2,500 a month | | Quoleady | 1.5: c, half a | Training side only | AIScope plus manual prompt tests; monthly reports | LLM sessions, 1,270 to 1,599 in 3 months (Legal Nodes) | No published rate for LLM work | | Qoulomb | 1: half a, half d, in a case | Both | No tracker named; audits test up to 20 queries | AI-referred sessions, 267 to 6,187 in nine months (Zetwerk) | Audits $50, $150 or $450 at launch pricing; no retainer rate | | Frontal | 0 of 4 | Not addressed | No AI-answer tracker or crawler report; target-account engagement and rankings | No SEO, LLM or AI-search result published | No rate published; scope set on a call | A score records which kinds of work a firm sells, not how well it does them, and a case figure reflects a whole program, not one change. Crawler access only pays off when buyers ask an assistant about your category; reach the rest through other channels, such as [an outbound list](https://frontal.so/blog/outbound-list). ## Technical SEO Firms Selling AI Crawler Work Six LLM SEO agencies present technical SEO as their own work: Screaming Frog calls itself “technical SEO experts,” and the other five sell technical SEO by name. ### 1. Omnius, Best for Opening Access to Four Named AI Crawlers ![Omnius homepage with a large black headline calling it a B2B SEO and AI search marketing agency for SaaS, fintech and AI companies, above a case card with a rising line chart and buttons to partner or book a call](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/omnius-homepage.webp) **Best for:** SaaS, fintech and AI companies whose sites may be shutting out AI crawlers. **Lead fact:** Omnius opens access for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Google-Extended: a page they can’t reach “can’t be cited in a live answer” or learned by the next model. **AI access work (of 4):** 3.5: access audits for four named AI crawlers, JavaScript reduction and llms.txt, plus half for crawler monitoring. **Retrieval or training data:** Both, in one sentence. **Measurement it publishes:** An unnamed in-house tool tracks citations, mentions and sentiment in ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Claude; no prompt count or cadence. **AI case figure:** ANNA Money, named: AI-search clicks up 164.44% from May to September 2025, and AI Overview keywords from 183 to 837. **Home base:** London headquarters, with offices in Dubai and Belgrade. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Named-bot access.** It audits and opens access for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Google-Extended. - **JavaScript reduction.** Aimed at AI crawlers. **Points to test:** - **Monitoring source.** Ask whether it reads your server or CDN logs. - **Unnamed tool.** Ask to see its tracker’s output before signing. **Rates on its site:** None published; no term stated. ### 2. DEJAN, Best for Model-Memory Work Alongside Crawl Rules for Each AI Bot ![DEJAN homepage with a green eyebrow and the headline Australian AI SEO Agency: Engineering Brand Citations in AI Search & LLMs, two buttons, and a Free AI Search Analysis form with a website field and an Australia market selector](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/dejan-homepage.webp) **Best for:** Brands wanting named-bot crawl rules and model-memory work from one firm. **Lead fact:** DEJAN writes crawl rules for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Google-Extended, and in the same program works to “correct model memory.” **AI access work (of 4):** 3: AI bot access policies, a “Full AI bot crawlability and rendering audit,” and llms.txt. **Retrieval or training data:** Both: model memory and the pages AI systems retrieve. **Measurement it publishes:** Its own AI Rank tool, “hundreds” of test queries and monthly tracking. **AI case figure:** OWAYO, a named sportswear maker, rose from 1.5% to 8.0% of brand mentions in US AI answers about custom sportswear, March 19 to July 29, 2026. **Home base:** Brisbane, Australia, since 2008. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Fixed-price audit.** Rendering for AI bots sits inside it. - **Results by market.** Each measurement is isolated by market. **Points to test:** - **Consumer case.** Ask for a B2B example beside OWAYO. - **No log analysis.** Ask how it confirms the bots reach your pages. **Rates on its site:** AUD 5,000 for a one-time audit and retainers from AUD 5,000 a month, plus GST in Australia; no term published. ### 3. Gray Dot Co, Best for AI Bot Log Analysis Paired With a Rendering Audit ![Gray Dot Co homepage with a teal banner offering free Chrome extensions for AI crawl visibility and JS SEO, the serif headline Connecting the Dots Between AI & Search, a Connect With an Expert button and painted shapes](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/gray-dot-co-homepage.webp) **Best for:** React, Next.js or Nuxt sites needing log proof of which AI bots reach which pages. **Lead fact:** One Gray Dot Co page sells AI bot access checks, rendering audits and log analysis showing which bots crawl, how often and why. **AI access work (of 4):** 3: access, rendering and logs, each tied to AI bots. **Retrieval or training data:** Both: content kept “out of AI datasets” and content that feeds “generative answers.” **Measurement it publishes:** Prompt visibility and citation counts; no tool or cadence on its service pages. **AI case figure:** None published; its results page shows migration and organic cases. **Home base:** No street address published; team across the US and Canada. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Log analysis in full.** Only Screaming Frog matches it here. - **Candor on tools.** It says “no tool offers full visibility into citation volume yet.” **Points to test:** - **No llms.txt work.** Ask who would write and maintain the file. - **No AI case.** Ask for a result you can check. **Rates on its site:** None published; consulting or per-project work on flexible contracts. ### 4. Screaming Frog, Best for A/B Testing Pages Against AI Bot Visits From Your Logs ![Screaming Frog homepage with a green hero describing a UK SEO agency that also makes a website crawler and a log file tool, buttons for agency services and the SEO Spider, and a grid of twelve service tiles](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/screaming-frog-homepage.webp) **Best for:** Teams wanting AI bot activity read from logs and changes tested against controls first. **Lead fact:** The agency, from the company behind the SEO Spider crawler, tests page changes against controls and measures AI bot visits in your logs. **AI access work (of 4):** 2: an AI bot access check and log analysis, both in its own log file tool. **Retrieval or training data:** Both: it tracks AI bot use “across training, indexing and real-time citations.” **Measurement it publishes:** Log data, “bespoke GA4 AI referral tracking” and prompt tracking with no count. **AI case figure:** None for AI search; its B2B case counts leads from paid and organic search. **Home base:** Henley-on-Thames, UK, founded in 2010. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Controlled tests.** Changes are judged against control pages. - **Its own log tool.** The analysis runs on software the company builds. **Points to test:** - **No JavaScript or llms.txt work.** Neither appears on its AI or technical pages. - **Day rate only.** Ask how many days a first project takes. **Rates on its site:** Day rate, no figure published; days agreed per project. ### 5. Momentic, Best for Crawler Findability Checks Inside Weekly Answer Tracking ![Momentic homepage with the headline Influence what search & AI say about your brand, a row of AI assistant icons, a paragraph naming Google, ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Claude and Perplexity, and a smiling red cartoon block](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/momentic-homepage.webp) **Best for:** Brands wanting crawler reachability and answer tracking from one managed team. **Lead fact:** Momentic’s Atlas tool, both software and service in its own words, lists which pages GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Googlebot can reach. **AI access work (of 4):** 1.5: Atlas checks which pages GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Googlebot can reach, plus half for general JavaScript SEO. **Retrieval or training data:** Both: it names “training, retrieval, and inference” as separate gaps. **Measurement it publishes:** Atlas sends buyer prompts to seven AI platforms plus Google Search, “typically weekly”; no prompt count. **AI case figure:** None for a client in AI search. **Home base:** Milwaukee, Wisconsin, since 2018. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **A fixed-scope start.** Work begins with a discovery plan of fixed scope. - **Plain about limits.** “How do you measure AI search? Imperfectly, and we say so.” **Points to test:** - **Logs not covered.** Ask how it checks what crawlers actually fetched. - **Content is the lever.** Its page calls content “the main way” Atlas shifts answers. **Rates on its site:** No published rate; Atlas carries a monthly platform fee quoted per brand, after a fixed-scope discovery plan. ### 6. iPullRank, Best for Enterprise Sites Needing JavaScript and Log File Audits ![iPullRank homepage with a two-line headline about AI recommendations and being remembered, orange and white buttons, and a 1970s-style photo of five people over a map beside a reel-to-reel tape machine](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/ipullrank-homepage.webp) **Best for:** Large companies with JavaScript-heavy sites needing log-file expertise. **Lead fact:** iPullRank’s technical SEO page credits its team with JavaScript SEO, modern log file auditing and migrations, none of it aimed at AI crawlers. **AI access work (of 4):** 1: half each for JavaScript SEO and log file auditing, sold for search in general. **Retrieval or training data:** Retrieval only: how a model picks which retrieved sources to cite. **Measurement it publishes:** Citation frequency and AI referral traffic; no tracker named. **AI case figure:** An unnamed telecom brand grew its AI Overview inclusions from 712 to 3,235 year over year. **Home base:** New York. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Migration experience.** On the same technical page. - **A free raw-HTML scan.** Try it before any call. **Points to test:** - **AI bots in logs.** Ask whether its log audits break out GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot. - **No published rate.** Ask what each tier costs and what it covers. **Rates on its site:** No published rate; tiers run 3 months (Emerging) or 12 months (Growth and Elite). ## Content and Web Studios With an LLM Practice DoodleWeb is a web design and development studio, Quoleady a SaaS content agency and Qoulomb a content-led AI SEO shop. Our firm comes last, by our choice. ### 7. DoodleWeb, Best for Crawler Settings Kept Current on a Monthly Plan ![DoodleWeb homepage with the eyebrow Digital studio, Seattle, the headline Websites built right, and found in Gemini, a paragraph on Drupal, WordPress, Webflow and Shopify builds, and an email and website form to check AI search ranking](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/doodleweb-homepage.webp) **Best for:** B2B teams on WordPress, Drupal, Webflow or Shopify wanting AI crawler settings maintained monthly. **Lead fact:** DoodleWeb’s monthly Core plan keeps “Schema, llms.txt and robots.txt fixed and kept current.” **AI access work (of 4):** 2: AI crawler configuration and llms.txt; no rendering or log work listed. **Retrieval or training data:** Not addressed. **Measurement it publishes:** Daily tracking of up to 20 buyer questions on Core or 100 on Custom, plus a monthly GA4 review. **AI case figure:** Gooten, named: within 3 weeks, GPTBot got the full page instead of a Cloudflare challenge. It counts access, not citations. **Home base:** Seattle, founded in 2019. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **A CDN fix on record.** Shown in the Gooten case. - **Ownership on payment.** Clients own delivered code and content on final payment. **Points to test:** - **The 90-day guarantee.** Ask how it measures “AI visibility” for that promise. - **Initial term.** Its FAQ says 90 days on every plan; get the term in writing. **Rates on its site:** Core costs $1,200 a month with 30 days’ notice to cancel; Custom starts at $2,500 a month on a 3-month initial term. ### 8. Quoleady, Best for SaaS Content Programs With the Technical Setup Included ![Quoleady homepage with the headline Your SaaS in AI answers and Google top results, a line calling it an AI SEO agency, a yellow Let's talk button and a 3D funnel illustration](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/quoleady-homepage.webp) **Best for:** SaaS firms buying content who want llms.txt and basic setup handled in the same program. **Lead fact:** Quoleady’s LLM program folds llms.txt and robots.txt into a “Technical Setup” step inside a SaaS content program. **AI access work (of 4):** 1.5: llms.txt in full, and half for a robots.txt step that names no AI crawler. **Retrieval or training data:** Training side only: “LLMs rely on patterns in their training data.” **Measurement it publishes:** AIScope plus manual prompt tests, with “Monthly visibility & performance reports.” **AI case figure:** Legal Nodes, named: LLM sessions rose from 1,270 to 1,599 over 3 months from March 2025. **Home base:** Tallinn, Estonia. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **llms.txt sold outright.** It’s listed among on-site fixes. - **A B2B case in sessions.** Its Legal Nodes result counts only LLM visits. **Points to test:** - **No AI bot named.** Ask which crawlers its robots.txt step checks. - **Training side only.** Ask how it handles live retrieval, which its pages don’t address. **Rates on its site:** No published rate for LLM work. ### 9. Qoulomb, Best for B2B Brands Weighing Live Retrieval Against Model Memory ![Qoulomb homepage with the eyebrow AI SEO & GEO agency, the headline SEO and AI search marketing that turns into real revenue, two buttons, and a mock Perplexity answer panel with tabs for ChatGPT, Google AI, Perplexity and Gemini](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/qoulomb-homepage.webp) **Best for:** B2B brands planning content for live retrieval and model memory, starting with a low-cost audit. **Lead fact:** Qoulomb’s LLM page says models “retrieve passages, check them against what they already know,” and its Zetwerk case whitelisted four AI crawlers, checked in server logs. **AI access work (of 4):** 1: half for crawler access, half for log checks, both seen only in that case. **Retrieval or training data:** Both: retrieval, plus “Models retrain and shift.” **Measurement it publishes:** Citation frequency by model and AI-referred sessions; audits test up to 20 queries; no tracker named. **AI case figure:** Zetwerk, named: AI-referred sessions grew from 267 to 6,187 in nine months, January to October 2025. **Home base:** Indore and Bengaluru, India, plus an Austin, Texas mailing address. **Worth shortlisting for:** - **One-off audits.** Start with a report before any retainer. - **Accuracy tracked.** It checks how accurately each model describes you. **Points to test:** - **Crawler work only in a case.** Write it into your scope. - **Launch pricing.** The audit prices apply to its “first 100 customers.” **Rates on its site:** Audits at $50, $150 or $450; no retainer rate. ### 10. Frontal, Best for Pages That Answer Buyer Questions Once Crawlers Can Reach You ![Dark What we build section from Frontal's content engineering service, with rows for founder content, team content and search and AI discovery, each listing what it includes and the tools used](https://frontal.so/images/blog/best-llm-seo-agencies/dark-what-we-build-section-from-frontal-page.webp) **Best for:** B2B tech teams with crawler access already handled who want search and AI-answer pages written from their own team’s expertise, such as a scale-up past product-market fit with a real sales team. **Lead fact:** Frontal is the firm we run. Its [content engineering](https://frontal.so/services/content-engineering) service writes the pages that answer the questions buyers type into Google and ChatGPT: SEO and GEO articles, comparison and use-case pages, and FAQ pages, built from interviews with your founders and team. On AI, its page says: “We use AI for research and first drafts. Our writers pull ideas from your interviews, edit the drafts and check them against what you told us.” **AI access work (of 4):** 0 of 4: none of the four kinds is on its service page. **Retrieval or training data:** Not addressed. **Measurement it publishes:** No AI-answer tracker, prompt set or crawler report. It reviews target-account engagement, rankings and inbound mentions, counting pipeline only where your CRM shows it. **AI case figure:** None; Frontal publishes no result in SEO, LLM or AI search. **Home base:** Shanghai (remote team). **Worth shortlisting for:** - **Research is part of the service.** Alongside writing, design and publishing. - **Pages your sales team can send.** Sales can share them with prospects. **Points to test:** - **Scope in writing.** Ask which pages, how many a month and which reports are in the statement of work before it starts. - **Ahrefs is the one SEO tool named.** Ask which reports you’ll see, and how often. **Rates on its site:** None listed; scope, channels and volume decide the fee, set in a statement of work after a call. Most clients start with one service. Once crawler access is sorted, bring the topic buyers most often ask AI assistants about to [a scoping call](https://book.frontal.so/). ## Prices LLM Optimization Agencies Put in Writing $1,200 a month is DoodleWeb’s Core plan, the lowest monthly fee any firm on this list publishes in US dollars. Four firms put a price or pricing basis on their own pages. | Agency | Published price | Term | | --- | --- | --- | | DoodleWeb | Core $1,200 a month; Custom from $2,500 a month | Core: cancel with 30 days’ notice; Custom: 3-month initial term | | DEJAN | Strategic AI Search Audit AUD 5,000 one-time; retainer from AUD 5,000 a month | GST added for Australian clients; no term published | | Qoulomb | AI visibility audits at $50, $150 or $450, launch pricing | One-off reports; no retainer rate | | Screaming Frog | Day rate, figure not published | Days agreed per project | Of the rest, Omnius, Gray Dot Co, Momentic, iPullRank, Quoleady (for LLM work) and Frontal publish no rate. DEJAN quotes Australian dollars, so compare in AUD without converting. DoodleWeb’s pricing FAQ sets a 90-day initial term on every plan, Core included, so confirm the term in writing. Much crawler work is a one-time fix, so ask what a monthly fee buys after it ships. Some retainers thin out once setup ends, a risk buyers also weigh with [GTM consulting services](https://frontal.so/blog/best-gtm-consulting-services). ## Ask Each Finalist to Read Your Server Logs Before signing with any of these LLM visibility agencies, ask each finalist for three things, starting with a read of your own logs. ### A Week of Log Lines Filtered to AI Bots Ask for a week of server or CDN log lines for GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot: which pages each fetched, and how many hit 404s. Then ask how the firm confirmed each bot was real, since a user agent can be faked and OpenAI and Perplexity publish their bots’ IP addresses. The same logs hold visitor IP addresses, so agree how long the firm keeps them. ### A Read-Only Audit Before Any Rule Change Ask for a read-only audit first, with robots.txt and CDN rules backed up before anything changes. That’s the order a careful [CRM hygiene](https://frontal.so/plays/crm-hygiene) cleanup follows: audit without writing, back up, then change. ### A Named Owner for the Settings After Launch A CDN toggle can rewrite robots.txt without anyone touching the file. So ask who checks the settings after launch, and how often, the same ownership question buyers of [CRM implementation services](https://frontal.so/blog/crm-implementation-services) ask after go-live. ## Frequently Asked Questions ### Who are the best LLM SEO agencies in 2026? Among LLM SEO agencies, pick Omnius to open access for named AI crawlers, DEJAN for crawl rules per bot with model-memory work, and Gray Dot Co for AI bot logs. Screaming Frog tests pages against AI bot visits, Momentic pairs findability with weekly tracking, and iPullRank suits JavaScript-heavy enterprise sites. DoodleWeb maintains crawler settings, Quoleady bundles llms.txt into SaaS content, and Qoulomb weighs retrieval against model memory. Frontal, our firm, writes the pages buyers find in search and AI answers once crawlers can reach your site. ### Should we block GPTBot to keep our content out of AI training? You can. OpenAI says GPTBot crawls content that may train its models, while OAI-SearchBot governs ChatGPT search, and each setting is independent. Google-Extended covers Gemini and doesn’t affect Google Search, so you can block training bots and leave search bots open. ### Does an llms.txt file help ChatGPT or Perplexity cite us? None of Google, OpenAI, Anthropic or Perplexity says it reads llms.txt to build answers. Google says Search doesn’t need it, and the other three are silent on it in their crawler docs. Chrome’s Lighthouse checks for the file but calls it optional, so judge LLM visibility agencies on more than llms.txt. ### How much does an LLM SEO agency cost? DoodleWeb starts at $1,200 a month and DEJAN at AUD 5,000 a month, while Qoulomb’s audits start at $50 at launch pricing. Omnius, Gray Dot Co, Momentic, iPullRank and Frontal publish no rate, nor does Quoleady for LLM work. Ask about the minimum term too, since a [Belkins pricing](https://frontal.so/blog/belkins-pricing) review found minimums add cost before results show. ### How long before LLM SEO work shows results? OpenAI and Perplexity each say a robots.txt change can take about 24 hours to register. The traffic and citation results the listed firms chose to publish run from three months at Quoleady to a year at iPullRank. When AI-referred visitors fill in a form, a same-afternoon reply is a routing job for [sales workflow automation](https://frontal.so/blog/sales-workflow-automation). ### Can Frontal fix AI crawler access on our site? No. Frontal sells none of the four kinds of access work. Its content engineering turns founder and team interviews into articles, FAQ pages and use-case or comparison pages that answer the questions buyers ask Google and ChatGPT. Pair it with one of the technical firms above if your crawler access needs work first. ## The LLM SEO Agency to Call for Each Layer Start with two checks of your own. If named AI crawlers can’t reach your pages, we’d call Omnius to audit and open their access. If your pricing page, fetched without running JavaScript, comes back missing content, try Gray Dot Co’s rendering audit for AI bots. For crawl rules by bot alongside model memory, call DEJAN. With no view of which bots reach which pages, try Screaming Frog or Gray Dot Co; for settings that need upkeep, DoodleWeb. Once crawlers can reach your pages, our content engineering team writes the pages that answer your buyers’ questions, from your own team’s interviews. [Book a call](https://book.frontal.so/). About the author Alex Vacca Founder, Frontal Alex founded Frontal, where GTM engineering, paid media and content work alongside B2B sales teams. He writes about choosing a go-to-market approach, connecting channels and evaluating agency partners. Work with Frontal Want us to run this for you? Book a call and we’ll walk you through how we would make it work for you. [Book a call](https://book.frontal.so) ## Keep reading [Browse all articles ↗](https://frontal.so/blog) GTM Oct 15, 2026 ### [What Is GTM Engineering? A Guide for B2B Revenue Leaders](https://frontal.so/blog/what-is-gtm-engineering) GTM engineering builds the lists, signals and CRM workflows behind your pipeline. What GTM engineers do, how it differs from RevOps, and when to hire or partner. **[Alex Vacca](https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-vacca)** Founder, Frontal [Read article](https://frontal.so/blog/what-is-gtm-engineering) GTM Oct 21, 2026 ### [Best GTM Agency in 2026: The Buyer’s Shortlist](https://frontal.so/blog/best-gtm-agencies) The best GTM agency isn’t the one sending the most. It’s the one that can prove revenue. See the 2026 shortlist, ranked on proof. **[Kenny Damian](https://www.linkedin.com/in/kenny-damian-90aba221a/)** Head of GTM [Read article](https://frontal.so/blog/best-gtm-agencies) GTM Nov 9, 2026 ### [What Are the Best Clay Automation Agencies? A Complete Guide](https://frontal.so/blog/best-clay-automation-agencies) Explore our full breakdown of the best Clay automation agencies, including what they offer, who they serve, and how to choose the right one. **[Kenny Damian](https://www.linkedin.com/in/kenny-damian-90aba221a/)** Head of GTM [Read article](https://frontal.so/blog/best-clay-automation-agencies)