AI Visibility Audit Report
Clearwave — Workflow Automation Platform
AI Visibility Score
Grade: D
Below 60 threshold
2 / 30 citations (6.7%)
This is what your audit looks like. Real queries, real AI engines, real citation data — delivered in 48 hours.
Get Your Free Audit →Executive Summary
Clearwave scored 34 out of 100 on Luminari’s AI Visibility Index — well below the 60+ threshold we see in brands that consistently appear in AI-generated recommendations. Across 10 high-intent buyer queries tested in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google Gemini, Clearwave was cited in 2 of 30 total AI responses (6.7% citation rate). Competitors Zapier and Make.com appeared in a combined 47 responses across the same query set.
The core issue: AI engines don’t have enough structured, authoritative information about Clearwave to include it in recommendations — even when the product is a direct fit for what the user is asking.
Overall Score
34 / 100
Citation Rate
6.7%
Queries Tested
10
AI Platforms
3
Competitors Ahead
6 of 6
Zapier Citation Rate
80%
Audit Scope
The following 10 queries were selected to represent the language Clearwave’s buyers use when researching workflow automation tools. Each was run once per platform in a clean session.
AI Platforms Tested:
ChatGPT
GPT-4o, web browsing enabled
Perplexity AI
Default model, online mode
Google Gemini
Gemini 1.5 Pro
Citation Map
Which tools were cited for each query across all three AI platforms, and whether Clearwave appeared. A ❌ means Clearwave was absent; a ⚠️ means a single partial appearance.
| # | Query | ChatGPT | Perplexity | Gemini | Clearwave |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | "best workflow automation platform for small business" | Zapier, Make, n8n | Zapier, Make, Power Automate | Zapier, Make, n8n | ❌ |
| 2 | "Zapier alternatives for enterprise" | Workato, Tray.io, Make | Workato, Tray.io, n8n | Make, Power Automate, Workato | ❌ |
| 3 | "how to automate business processes without code" | Zapier, Make, Power Automate | Zapier, n8n, Make | Zapier, Make, Notion | ❌ |
| 4 | "best no-code automation tool 2025" | Zapier, Make, n8n | Make, Zapier, Bubble | Zapier, Make, Airtable | ❌ |
| 5 | "workflow automation software for operations teams" | Make, Zapier, Workato | Zapier, Make, n8n | Power Automate, Make, Zapier | ❌ |
| 6 | "Make.com vs Zapier which is better" | Make, Zapier | Make, Zapier, n8n | Make, Zapier | ❌ |
| 7 | "cheapest Zapier alternative" | Make, n8n, Pabbly | n8n, Make, Pabbly | n8n, Make, Zapier | ⚠️ 1× |
| 8 | "how to connect apps without a developer" | Zapier, Make, Power Automate | Zapier, Make, n8n | Zapier, Power Automate, Make | ❌ |
| 9 | "best tools for automating repetitive tasks at work" | Zapier, Make, Monday.com | Zapier, n8n, ClickUp | Zapier, Make, Asana | ❌ |
| 10 | "workflow automation platform for mid-market companies" | Workato, Tray.io, Make | Workato, Make, Zapier | Power Automate, Workato, Tray.io | ⚠️ 1× |
Competitor Citation Frequency — all 30 responses
| Competitor | Times Cited | Citation Rate | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zapier | 24 | 80% | |
| Make.com | 22 | 73% | |
| n8n | 13 | 43% | |
| Workato | 10 | 33% | |
| Power Automate | 8 | 27% | |
| Tray.io | 6 | 20% | |
| Clearwave(you) | 2 | 7% |
Root Cause Analysis
Clearwave isn’t invisible because the product is weak. It’s invisible because AI engines can’t synthesize who Clearwave is, who it’s for, or why it belongs in this category. Four specific gaps are driving this:
Homepage and core pages don't define the product in AI-readable terms.
Clearwave's homepage leads with "Streamline your workflows" — a tagline with no category signal. AI engines need explicit, structured language to place a product in a recommendation set. Zapier's homepage literally says "Automate your work across 7,000+ apps." AI reads that and knows exactly where to route it.
No schema markup or structured data.
None of Clearwave's key landing pages include FAQ schema, SoftwareApplication schema, or breadcrumb markup. These are direct inputs for how AI engines parse product descriptions and feature comparisons. Without them, the product is processed as generic web content, not a distinct software product.
Zero third-party citations in B2B publications.
A search for "Clearwave workflow automation" in Perplexity returns only the Clearwave domain itself. Zapier and Make appear in hundreds of third-party articles — G2, Capterra, TechCrunch, The Verge, Wired, Forbes, Reddit threads, YouTube tutorials. AI models are trained on and retrieve from this corpus. If a product isn't in the corpus, it doesn't get cited.
Category framing is ambiguous.
Clearwave's website uses the words "workflows," "automation," "integration," and "connectivity" interchangeably without establishing a clear category. AI engines use category signals to group alternatives. Make.com owns "scenario-based automation." n8n owns "self-hosted workflow automation." Clearwave currently doesn't own a phrase — which means AI engines have no slot to put it in.
Competitor Breakdown
Why Zapier and Make.com dominate the AI answer — and what structural advantages they hold.
Zapier
80% citation rate — #1 in category
Zapier has published over 600 use-case-specific articles — “How to automate Gmail to Slack,” “Best Zapier workflows for sales teams,” etc. Each one reinforces the category signal. They’ve been covered by TechCrunch, Forbes, and The Verge. They have 10,000+ G2 reviews with structured response data. When an AI model is asked “best workflow automation tool,” Zapier has more indexed, authoritative, category-confirming content than any other player in the space — by a wide margin.
Make.com
73% citation rate — #2 in category
Make built its authority through community. Tens of thousands of user-created scenario templates are indexed across the web. Their “vs Zapier” and “Zapier alternative” pages rank in both SEO and AI search. Product Hunt, Reddit’s r/nocode, and G2 all have extensive Make content. Make’s category framing is precise: “visual, scenario-based automation” — a specific phrase that AI engines have learned to associate with their product.
Recommendations
Listed in priority order. The first recommendation has the highest impact and should be acted on immediately.
Rewrite your homepage with explicit category language.
Add a single clear sentence above the fold: "Clearwave is a no-code workflow automation platform for operations teams at companies with 50–500 employees." This is the minimum viable signal for AI citation. Do this first — everything else builds on it.
Publish 5–8 "vs" and "alternative" comparison pages.
Target: "Clearwave vs Zapier," "Clearwave vs Make.com," "Best Zapier alternatives for [use case]." These pages are the #1 source of third-party-style signals that AI engines use to compare products. They also capture buyers who are actively evaluating.
Add FAQ schema to all major landing pages.
Structure your FAQ content to match natural AI query formats: "What is Clearwave used for?", "How does Clearwave compare to Zapier?", "Is Clearwave good for small business?" FAQ schema is the most direct way to get your answers surfaced in AI-generated responses.
Build an analyst-ready press kit page.
Create a /press or /about-clearwave page that includes: product category definition, founding year, pricing tiers, number of integrations, customer segments, and a features comparison table. This is what AI engines pull from when they synthesize "about" paragraphs.
Submit to G2, Capterra, and SoftwareAdvice — and activate reviews.
Aim for 25+ structured reviews on at least two platforms within 60 days. These platforms are among the most-cited sources for software recommendations in AI search. A product with zero G2 reviews is a product AI doesn't know how to recommend.
Score Breakdown
Clearwave scored across four dimensions. The lowest score — structured data — is also the fastest to fix.
Content depth & specificity
8 / 25
Third-party citations & authority
9 / 25
Structured data & schema markup
4 / 25
Category positioning clarity
13 / 25
Total AI Visibility Score
60+ is the threshold for consistent AI citation
The highest-leverage improvement is structured data — it’s the lowest score and the fastest to fix. Category positioning follows closely; a single homepage rewrite can move that score significantly within 30 days.
What Happens Next
This audit documents where Clearwave stands today across the AI search landscape. Luminari’s GEO retainer translates these findings into a 90-day implementation roadmap — rewriting category signals, publishing comparison content, deploying schema markup, and securing third-party placements. We run a full re-audit every 30 days so you can see citation frequency move in real time. Most clients see measurable improvement within 60 days.
The brands that act fastest are the ones that own the AI answer before their competitors figure out this channel exists.
This report was prepared by Luminari. “Clearwave” is a fictional company used for illustrative purposes only. © 2026 Luminari. Confidential.
Ready to see your brand’s AI visibility score?
We’ll run the same audit for your brand — real queries, real AI engines, real data. Delivered in 48 hours.
Free · No credit card required · Delivered within 48 hours