See how AI answers when buyers compare you with your competitors.
Track the buyer questions that matter across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Grok. See who gets recommended, where you appear, the sources cited alongside those answers, and what to investigate next.
No card required, snapshot delivered during onboarding. Runs repeat monthly, or weekly on higher plans: read the methodology.
Named in 41% of buying conversations where a brand like yours should appear.
22 of the 60 tracked questions never name Velora, concentrated in 3 topics. The responses behind that number are further down this page.
What actually happened, answer by answer.
Each captured response is stored as it was returned: the text, the brands named and the order they appeared in, and the sources cited alongside them. The score above is an aggregate of these, and every part of it opens back into them.
“best vitamin C serum for sensitive skin under £40”
What to investigate next. You are named only when a source mentions fragrance-free formulation. No Velora page is cited for “vitamin C · sensitive skin”: skincarelab.co.uk cites Glowrise twice on the page that drives this answer.
22 of the 60 tracked questions never name the brand, concentrated in three topics.
Who wins the answers you lose.
Aggregated across 60 questions, five systems and repeated runs, the competitive picture stops being anecdotal: who is named first, who is named beside you, and which topics never name you at all. Each rank traces back to the responses it was counted from.
Glowrise takes two in every three answers on this topic and is almost always named first.
| Topic | Velora | Glowrise | Bloomlab | Peau & Co | 30d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitive skin | — | #1 | #2 | #3 | ▼ −2 |
| Fragrance-free | #1 | #3 | — | #2 | ▲ +14 |
| Vitamin C serums | #3 | #1 | #2 | — | ▲ +4 |
| Rosacea | — | #1 | #3 | #2 | ▼ −6 |
| Sustainability | #1 | #4 | #3 | #2 | ▲ +5 |
| Price / value | #4 | #2 | #1 | #3 | ▼ −3 |
What would move you up. A sensitive-skin resource of your own, plus getting the fragrance-free claim into the two editorial pages already cited here.
The questions you never appear in.
Presence is recorded per question, per system, per run. Filter to absence and the gap stops being a feeling: which questions, which topics they cluster in, who takes them instead, and how consistently.
| Question | Topic | Intent | Status | Leader | 30d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| best vitamin C serum for sensitive skin under £40 | Vitamin C | Consideration | Named · 3rd | Glowrise | ▲ +4 |
| gentle vitamin C serum for rosacea | Rosacea | Problem | Absent | Glowrise | ▼ −6 |
| is Velora Bright Boost C any good? | Brand | Purchase | Named · 1st | Velora | ▲ +2 |
| fragrance-free skincare brands UK | Fragrance-free | Discovery | Named · 1st | Velora | ▲ +14 |
| Velora vs Glowrise vitamin C | Comparison | Comparison | Named · 2nd | Glowrise | ▲ +3 |
| affordable dermatologist-tested serums | Price / value | Consideration | Absent | Bloomlab | ▼ −3 |
| what to use after retinol irritation | Retinol alt. | Use case | Absent | Peau & Co | 0 |
| most sustainable skincare packaging | Sustainability | Discovery | Named · 1st | Velora | ▲ +5 |
| vitamin C serum that won’t sting | Sensitive skin | Problem | Absent | Glowrise | ▼ −2 |
What gets cited alongside the answers.
Herm records the sources each response cites and the pages they point to. Over repeated runs a pattern emerges: which editorial guides, review sites, community threads, retailer categories and owned pages keep appearing where your category is discussed, and how little of that is yours.
| Domain | Type | Citations | Questions | AI systems | Brands cited alongside | 30d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| skincarelab.co.uk never cites Velora | Editorial | 214 | 38 | 5 of 5 | Glowrise, Bloomlab | ▲ +12 |
| dermreview.com | Review | 168 | 31 | 4 of 5 | Bloomlab, Velora | ▲ +6 |
| glowrise.com never cites Velora | Competitor owned | 141 | 24 | 5 of 5 | Glowrise | ▲ +9 |
| r/SkincareAddiction never cites Velora | Community | 126 | 29 | 3 of 5 | Glowrise, Peau & Co | ▲ +18 |
| boots.com | Retailer | 98 | 22 | 4 of 5 | All six brands | 0 |
| which-beauty.co.uk never cites Velora | Editorial | 87 | 19 | 3 of 5 | Glowrise, Nuvéa | ▼ −4 |
| velora.com | Owned | 62 | 11 | 4 of 5 | Velora | ▲ +21 |
| youtube.com never cites Velora | Community | 54 | 17 | 2 of 5 | Glowrise, Bloomlab | ▲ +7 |
On causation. Herm reports the sources cited in an answer and the patterns associated with visibility. It does not claim a source caused a recommendation.
Visibility tells you whether you appear. See what AI keeps saying when you do.
Recurring claims are grouped from the response text itself: how often each one is attached to your brand, which systems repeat it, which sources carry it, and the verbatim lines it was read from. Where a claim is contested, the counter-evidence you have not published is named.
“Velora sits at the premium end for the concentration you get.”
“One of the few fragrance-free options that rarely stings.”
“Refill system and recycled glass are ahead of most of the category.”
“Less clinical data behind it than Glowrise or Bloomlab.”
Counter-evidence to publish. Cost-per-use and refill pricing appear nowhere in the sources carrying this claim.
Narratives are read from what the systems wrote, not from what they were thinking. Herm does not have access to model reasoning and does not infer it.
Not every visibility problem is a content problem.
Findings are typed by what would actually have to change: owned content, citation and PR, product data, retailer feeds, brand claims. Each carries the scope, evidence, priority and effort it was ranked on. A missing attribute in a retailer feed is not a blog post, and the workspace says so.
Publish a sensitivity and patch-testing guide, then get the tolerance data in front of the two domains that decide this topic.
- Absent from 7 of 9 runs
- Competitors cited on 3 editorial pages
- No dedicated owned page
- Feed missing sensitivity attribute
Add fragrance-free and sensitivity attributes to the retailer feed so retailer pages can state them.
- Retailer pages omit the claim
- Named first where the claim appears
- Attribute absent from the feed
Submit the 2025 tolerance study to skincarelab.co.uk and dermreview.com, both already cited on these answers.
- Two domains carry 9 of the answers
- Neither cites Velora
- Both cite Glowrise
The ingredient tables render client-side, so the pages return no readable content to a crawler.
- Ingredient content is script-rendered
- No structured data on product pages
- Owned pages cited on 11 questions only
“For rosacea-prone skin, Glowrise Radiance and Peau & Co Calm C are the two most commonly recommended…” Gemini 2.5 · run 12 · 14 Aug 2026
What needs to change?
A visibility finding resolves into one of two kinds of work: what AI systems can actually access on your site, or the useful information that is missing from it. Each finding routes to the layer that owns the fix.
When the problem is access, structure, extractability or technical site readiness.
Explore Site Intelligence →When the problem is missing, weak or outdated useful information.
Explore Content Suite →When the issue is structured product and commerce information rather than long-form content.
Explore Product Readiness →From finding to brief your team can act on.
A finding becomes a brief carrying the questions it answers, the responses it came from, the claims that are already approved and the sources currently competing for that answer. Writing and approval stay with your team.
If you’re running GEO today, this is the whole loop: scoreboard and playbook in one place, and the first rung of a taller ladder.
“gentle vitamin C serum for rosacea”
Recommended intervention: publish a fitting-and-tolerance guide, enhance the product data with sensitivity attributes, and put the tolerance study in front of the two publishers that already decide this topic.
- No clinical claims beyond the 2025 tolerance study.
- Never say “dermatologist recommended”, say “dermatologist tested”.
- Rosacea copy must carry the patch-test caveat.
Export to Docs, your CMS or as a publisher submission. The next run re-measures these 11 questions automatically. Writing and approval stay with your team.
What changed after you published.
The ledger records what was published, when it went live, and how the measured visibility moved on the runs that followed. Same panel, same questions, same method version.
| Published | What | Measured over | Movement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02 Jun | /guides/patch-testing | runs 8 to 10 | ▲ +6 |
| 19 Jun | /ingredients/thd-ascorbate | runs 9 to 11 | ▲ +4 |
| 07 Jul | Retailer feed · fragrance-free attribute | runs 10 to 12 | ▲ +11 |
| 28 Jul | /guides/sensitive-skin-routine | run 12 only | 0 |
Herm reports observed change over time. It does not claim the publication caused it: other factors move in the same window.
Put your visibility in category context.
Herm publishes sector indexes measured on the same fixed ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Grok panel your workspace uses. A workspace score is read against an Index distribution only where the two measurement panels are genuinely comparable.
Index results and Brand Visibility results are separate measurements on different question sets. They are not comparable, and no score on this site is derived by comparing one with the other.
| Live index | Market | Brands |
|---|---|---|
| cosmetics | Turkey | 322 |
| travel | Turkey | 175 |
| innerwear | Turkey | 189 |
| furniture | Turkey | 335 |
| evening-wear | Turkey | 191 |
3,734 brands ranked in the live Index today.
Beyond Brand Visibility
Brand Visibility works independently. When a team needs to go beyond visibility, Herm adds product, customer and outcome readiness around it.
Questions, answered plainly
Which AI systems do you measure?
The fixed five-system panel: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Grok. The same panel the public Herm Index uses.
How often does it run?
Runs repeat monthly, or weekly on higher plans. Every result carries its run, market and question set, because a score without its panel is not a comparable figure.
Where do the tracked questions come from?
Herm proposes a question set designed around your buyers and product range, you review and adjust it, and the panel is re-run at your plan cadence.
Can we compare our score with the Herm Index?
Index results and Brand Visibility results are separate measurements on different question sets. They are not comparable, and no score on this site is derived by comparing one with the other.
Does Herm know why a model recommended someone?
No. Herm records what was written and the sources cited alongside it. It does not have access to model reasoning, does not infer it, and does not claim a source caused a recommendation.
Do you write the content for us?
A finding becomes a brief carrying the questions, responses, approved claims and competing sources behind it. Writing and approval stay with your team.
Start with the answers you are already in, or missing from.
Your first snapshot runs during onboarding on the same five-system panel. Every visibility metric can be traced to the captured responses behind it.
Sample figures throughout.