I talk to 35 new companies every month about SEO and GEO.
Almost all of them are making the same data mistake…and they’re building 2026 budgets around it.
They all say the same thing: “AI search leads are so much better.”
When I ask how they arrived at that conclusion, it’s always the same story: They’re comparing all of their Google organic traffic, for example 200k visits a month across every funnel stage, to AI search leads, which are almost exclusively bottom of funnel.
Of course the AI leads convert better. You’re comparing apples to burgers.
Here’s what actually happened over the last 12 months and why your data is sh**.
CTR and traffic dropped massively for tons of keywords. Yet revenue from organic search stayed flat.
Why? Because most of what you were ranking for was vanity top-of-funnel junk that never moved the needle. Broad, informational keywords now eaten up by AI overviews and LLMs.
Zero-click searches (hat tip / coined by Amanda Natividad!).
You didn’t lose revenue, just vanity traffic that never made a difference in the first place.
Now look at AI search:
Brands nearly only get mentioned when someone asks for a specific solution. “I run a small business and need payroll services, what’s a good fit for a 10 employee company?”
The LLM spits out 5-6 tools. That’s it. That’s the only time you show up. It’s as bottom of funnel as it gets.
So when you compare 200k monthly organic visits where maybe 2,000 are meaningfully contributing to revenue against a channel that is ONLY purchase-intent recommendations, what exactly are you measuring?
Nothing useful.
Without proper data filtering, you can’t make this comparison. And if you’re making resource allocation decisions without it, you’re making a huge mistake.
GEO and SEO are not the same when it comes to data, intent, and usage. Stop treating their numbers like they’re interchangeable.
-Jeremy
