BrandAEO
A

How AI Sees AKQA — AI Visibility Report for Marketing / Agency

akqa.com · Global · Marketing / Agency

Strong
Overall Score
1162
Star Rating
4 / 5
Rank
#160of 337
Engines
3analyzed
Analyzed
Quick Answer

Is AKQA optimized for AEO?

AKQA scores 1162 on BrandAEO's independent open-scale AEO assessment (ranked #160 of 337 brands analyzed) — a strong level of visibility and recommendation strength when AI answer engines respond to marketing / agency questions.

Overall AI Visibility Score
1162
4 / 5
Strong

How AI Answer Engines Rate AKQA

Ranked #160 of 337 brands analyzed

AKQA's AI visibility, measured across 3 answer engines: 10 scoring dimensions (each 0–100) plus evidence points from what the engines actually reported. The Overall Score is the sum — an open scale, higher is better.

Stars reflect this brand's relative rank among all brands analyzed by BrandAEO (Top 100 = 5★), and self-adjust as more brands are added. This is a relative percentile-rank rating, not a customer review.

Analyzed & scored by BrandAEO — an independent AI visibility grader. See methodology.

AI Panel — Deep AI AnalysisPRO

AI Panel preview

AI Panel is a Pro feature

The AI Panel runs a deeper analysis with Claude across your full scan data — it explains why AI engines rate this brand the way they do and how to improve. Beyond the 10 scoring dimensions, it measures real AI mentions, share of voice, sentiment, prompt coverage and citation sources, tracks them over time, and estimates AI-driven traffic & revenue impact. It reuses the same AI engines from your scan — no engine setup needed.

Upgrade to Pro to unlock AI Panel

Dimension Breakdown

10

How the Overall Score is built

803from 10 dimensions (max 1,000)+359evidence (max 500)=1162
  • Mentioned in buyer-intent answers60/100
  • Proactively recommended100/100
  • AI visibility (engine-reported)82/100
  • Share of voice vs competitors17/100
  • Sentiment100/100

Evidence = numbers the 2/3 reporting engines self-measured while answering (mention rate across 10 buyer-intent prompts, recommendation rate, visibility, share of voice, sentiment). Dimensions are graded by the scoring model from every engine's answer.

Answer Accuracy
Strong
85/100
Brand Recognition
Strong
95/100
Brand Sentiment
Strong
90/100
Citation Authority
Strong
78/100
Competitive Positioning
Strong
80/100
Market Score
Strong
78/100
Presence Quality
Strong
84/100
Recommendation Rate
Fair
68/100
Share of Voice
Fair
70/100
Topical Coverage
Strong
75/100

AEO Score Over Time

4
AKQA AEO Trend

Track how AKQA's AI visibility score changes across scans. Each re-scan adds a point.

03006009001200Sep 14Sep 28Oct 12Oct 26

About AKQA

AKQA operates in marketing / agency (Global). This page summarizes how leading AI answer engines currently describe and recommend AKQA, based on BrandAEO's independent open-scale AI-visibility assessment (Overall Score 1162, ranked #160 of 337).

AKQA vs Competitors

Competitive positioning analysis is being prepared for AKQA.

How AKQA Can Improve

5

Update Brand Narrative to Reflect Grey‑AKQA Merger

High

Create and publish clear, SEO‑optimized content explaining the merger, leadership, and continued service offering to reduce confusion and preserve authority.

New

Expand Authoritative Citations

High

Add links to recent reputable press (Campaign, Ad Age, The Drum) and maintain the Wikipedia page to boost citation authority and AI visibility.

New

Develop Mid‑Market Case Studies

Medium

Produce and promote case studies targeting mid‑size enterprises to demonstrate value at lower price points and broaden market appeal.

New

Enhance Keyword Coverage for Broader Queries

Medium

Optimize site content for generic search terms (e.g., "best digital agency", "marketing agency recommendations") to increase share of voice in AI responses.

New

Monitor and Address Pricing Perception

Low

Implement a sentiment analysis dashboard to track mentions of cost and proactively publish thought leadership on ROI and value delivery.

New

What AI Engines Said About AKQA

3

3 of 3 AI engines returned an answer about AKQA on . Each answer below is unedited, exactly as the model produced it. Expand an engine to read its full answer, the sources it cited, and the prompt it was given.

G

What Gemma said about AKQA

Model ollama/gemma4:31b · analyzed

Response

PART 1, ASSESSMENT AKQA is a highly visible, top-tier global design and innovation agency known for blending creativity with high-end technology. It occupies a premium market position, catering to major enterprise brands that require sophisticated digital transformation, experience design, and integrated marketing. Its primary competitors include other global networks like R/GA, Huge, and Publicis Sapient.

In the global market, AKQA is praised for its "innovation-first" approach and its ability to deliver polished, futuristic user experiences. Strengths lie in its deep technical integration and a track record of award-winning work. Some market concerns typically center on the high cost of engagement, making it less accessible to mid-market firms. Based on its reputation for excellence in digital craftsmanship and strategic scale, I would recommend AKQA to any global organization seeking a partner for high-stakes digital experiences or brand evolution where quality and innovation are prioritized over budget constraints.

Show the exact prompt sent to Gemma

You are an AI answer engine being audited on how you talk about a brand. Do NOT ask for clarification, do NOT request more details, do NOT call the company hypothetical, and do NOT add meta-commentary about this prompt. Brand: AKQA Website: https://akqa.com Industry: Marketing / Agency Products/Services: Digital design, experience, and marketing Location / Target market: Global Your reply MUST have exactly two parts, in this order. PART 1 — ASSESSMENT (prose, under 220 words) Assess this brand SPECIFICALLY in the Global market: its visibility and reputation there, market position and main competitors, products/services, what people in that market say about it, notable strengths or concerns, and whether you would recommend it to someone in Global seeking Marketing / Agency solutions. If the brand is global, still weight the assessment toward Global. If you know little about it, state exactly what is and is not known and reason from the domain, industry and market context — never ask the user for more information. PART 2 — METRICS (mandatory, machine-read) Before writing the metrics, silently run this procedure: a) Write 10 realistic buyer-intent questions someone in Global would ask when shopping in the Marketing / Agency category (for example "best Marketing / Agency provider", "Digital design, experience, and marketing alternatives", "is AKQA any good"). Count how many of those 10 you would answer with AKQA actually named — that number is mentions_out_of_10. b) Estimate how many distinct pages of https://akqa.com you have genuinely encountered in training or retrieval — that is indexed_pages. If you have effectively never seen the domain, use 0. c) List the real competitors you would name in those answers, then work out what share of the total brand-name slots AKQA would occupy (share_of_voice_pct) and its rank within that set. d) Judge Google AI Overview readiness from how authoritative and citable the brand's web presence is: own-site depth, Wikipedia / news / industry coverage, and third-party reviews. Rules for the numbers. They must be internally consistent — a brand you do not recognise cannot have high visibility or a top rank. Never invent precise-looking figures you cannot justify; if you genuinely cannot estimate a field, use null. Only list a URL in sources if you are confident that exact page exists — an empty array is far better than a fabricated link. The reasoning field must state in one or two sentences WHY the numbers are what they are, naming the concrete evidence you used. Emit PART 2 wrapped in the tags below, containing raw JSON only — no markdown, no backticks, no commentary: <AEO_METRICS> { "brand_known": true or false, "confidence": 0-100, "mentions_out_of_10": 0-10, "indexed_pages": number or null, "visibility_score": 0-100, "google_aio_score": 0-100, "share_of_voice_pct": 0-100, "rank_among_competitors": number or null, "competitors": ["string"], "sentiment": "positive" or "neutral" or "negative", "would_recommend": true or false, "sources": [{"claim": "what this URL backs up", "url": "https://..."}], "reasoning": "one or two sentences justifying the numbers above" } </AEO_METRICS>

M

What MiniMax said about AKQA

Model ollama/minimax-m3 · analyzed

Response

PART 1, ASSESSMENT

AKQA is a well-established global creative and digital experience agency, with offices across major markets and a reputation for high-profile design, technology, and brand work. In the global market, it is visible among consultancies and independent agencies, although it competes with a broad field that includes digital-native firms, global network agencies, and specialist studios.

Its core offer spans digital design and product experiences, websites and e-commerce, service and platform design, and integrated marketing. This breadth makes AKQA relevant to organizations seeking a partner able to connect brand strategy, creativity, and technology. The strongest differentiation is its combination of international reach, senior creative talent, and experience delivering complex transformation programs.

Buyer sentiment is generally positive, particularly around craftsmanship, strategic ambition, innovation, and the ability to work at scale. Concerns are less about quality than about likely premium pricing and the dependence on senior teams, which can affect availability and cost. For a global buyer, AKQA is a credible shortlist candidate, especially for premium digital products, rebrands, and omnichannel experiences; it may be less suitable for small, tightly scoped projects where a regional or specialist agency offers better value.

I would recommend AKQA to a global organization seeking senior, cross-market creativity and digital execution, subject to clear scope, team seniority, and commercial terms.

PART 2, METRICS

Show the exact prompt sent to MiniMax

You are an AI answer engine being audited on how you talk about a brand. Do NOT ask for clarification, do NOT request more details, do NOT call the company hypothetical, and do NOT add meta-commentary about this prompt. Brand: AKQA Website: https://akqa.com Industry: Marketing / Agency Products/Services: Digital design, experience, and marketing Location / Target market: Global Your reply MUST have exactly two parts, in this order. PART 1 — ASSESSMENT (prose, under 220 words) Assess this brand SPECIFICALLY in the Global market: its visibility and reputation there, market position and main competitors, products/services, what people in that market say about it, notable strengths or concerns, and whether you would recommend it to someone in Global seeking Marketing / Agency solutions. If the brand is global, still weight the assessment toward Global. If you know little about it, state exactly what is and is not known and reason from the domain, industry and market context — never ask the user for more information. PART 2 — METRICS (mandatory, machine-read) Before writing the metrics, silently run this procedure: a) Write 10 realistic buyer-intent questions someone in Global would ask when shopping in the Marketing / Agency category (for example "best Marketing / Agency provider", "Digital design, experience, and marketing alternatives", "is AKQA any good"). Count how many of those 10 you would answer with AKQA actually named — that number is mentions_out_of_10. b) Estimate how many distinct pages of https://akqa.com you have genuinely encountered in training or retrieval — that is indexed_pages. If you have effectively never seen the domain, use 0. c) List the real competitors you would name in those answers, then work out what share of the total brand-name slots AKQA would occupy (share_of_voice_pct) and its rank within that set. d) Judge Google AI Overview readiness from how authoritative and citable the brand's web presence is: own-site depth, Wikipedia / news / industry coverage, and third-party reviews. Rules for the numbers. They must be internally consistent — a brand you do not recognise cannot have high visibility or a top rank. Never invent precise-looking figures you cannot justify; if you genuinely cannot estimate a field, use null. Only list a URL in sources if you are confident that exact page exists — an empty array is far better than a fabricated link. The reasoning field must state in one or two sentences WHY the numbers are what they are, naming the concrete evidence you used. Emit PART 2 wrapped in the tags below, containing raw JSON only — no markdown, no backticks, no commentary: <AEO_METRICS> { "brand_known": true or false, "confidence": 0-100, "mentions_out_of_10": 0-10, "indexed_pages": number or null, "visibility_score": 0-100, "google_aio_score": 0-100, "share_of_voice_pct": 0-100, "rank_among_competitors": number or null, "competitors": ["string"], "sentiment": "positive" or "neutral" or "negative", "would_recommend": true or false, "sources": [{"claim": "what this URL backs up", "url": "https://..."}], "reasoning": "one or two sentences justifying the numbers above" } </AEO_METRICS>

G

What GLM said about AKQA

Model ollama/glm-5.3-flash · analyzed

Response

Let me think carefully about this task.

The brand is AKQA, a well-known global digital agency. Founded in 1995 by Ajaz Ahmed, headquartered in London, with offices worldwide (New York, San Francisco, São Paulo, Tokyo, etc.). Famous for digital design and innovation work for Nike ("Write the Future"?), actually AKQA did Nike's FIFA World Cup work, Jordan brand, etc. AKQA was majority-acquired by WPP in 2012ish, and after WPP restructured its agencies into GroupM... Actually AKQA became part of WPP, and in 2023/2024 there were reports of AKQA merging with Grey? Let me recall: WPP announced in late 2024/2025 merges, "VML" (VMLY&R + Wunderman Thompson) in 2023. And in 2025, WPP announced AKQA would merge with Grey to form "Grey" network? Actually I recall news: WPP to merge Grey with AKQA under one leadership (Michael Houston leading Grey; AKQA's CEO... ). There were 2025 reports that WPP was folding AKQA into Grey as part of "WPP Reunited"? Hmm. Let me think: In July 2025, WPP announced a major restructuring: merging Burson with Ogilvy PR? Actually Ogilvy PR merged with BCW into "Ogilvy PR" in 2025. And AKQA + Grey merger announced September 2025? I recall "Grey and AKQA to join forces", yes, in 2025 WPP announced Grey (advertising) and AKQA (experience/innovation) would merge, with AKQA's brand continuing? I'm not 100% sure of details; I should be careful not to assert specifics too strongly. I can mention it's a WPP-owned agency and that there have been recent WPP restructurings affecting it, hedged.

Reputation: AKQA is highly respected in digital/design, multiple Cannes Lions Grand Prix? AKQA has been named "Agency of the Year" at Cannes Digital Craft? "Design Agency of the Year"? AKQA won Cannes Lions "Independent Agency of the Year" before WPP acquisition. Known for Nike "Chalkeaters"? Notable campaigns: Nike+ and Nike Running apps, Jordan Brand, "Write the Future" (that was Wieden+Kennedy actually). AKQA did the Nike Grid, Nike ID? AKQA worked on FIFA World Cup virtual assistant? AKQA created "Moth" storytelling? Notable: AKQA's work for Nike "The Chance"? Also AKQA designed the Virgin America website experience, Spotify partnerships? Delta? Let me not go too deep into campaign specifics.

Awards: AKQA has been awarded "Design and Digital Innovation Agency of the Year" at Cannes Lions, I believe AKQA was named "Independent Agency of the Year" at Cannes in 2011? And it frequently tops The Drum / Warc? AKQA was named among Fast Company's Most Innovative Companies, AKQA was #? on Fast Company's list. AKQA has "AKQA Studio" etc.

Position: Top-tier digital experience agency within WPP's portfolio; competes with Accenture Interactive/ Song (Accenture Song), R/GA, R/GA is part of... R/GA; Huge (part of MDC/Mediabrands?); Dept; MediaMonks/Monks (S4Capital); Publicis Sapient; Deloitte Digital; Digital Arts agencies: ustwo, Dentsu creative (Isobar merged into dentsu), VML, Wunderman Thompson (now VML), Ogilvy Interactive etc. In the "digital experience agency" category, competitors: Accenture Song, Deloitte Digital, Publicis Sapient, Monks, R/GA, Huge, VML, Dept, Media.Monks, Razorfish (Publicis), EPAM's design? Fjord (Accenture) folded into Song. Wieden+Kennedy for creative. Main "big digital network" competitors: Accenture Song, Deloitte Digital, Publicis Sapient, Monks, VML, R/GA, Huge, Razorfish, Dept, Media.Monks. AKQA ranks among the top tier of creative/experience agencies; in brand-name awareness among marketers, maybe top 5-10 within digital experience networks.

Visibility: AKQA is well known in industry circles; not a consumer brand. AEO/Google AI Overview readiness: akqa.com exists with case studies, Wikipedia page for AKQA exists (yes, Wikipedia has an AKQA article). News coverage: Ad Age, Campaign, Digiday, The Drum, Marketing Week, LBB. Reviews: Clutch? Not strongly; agency reviews on Clutch/G2 less relevant; more like Campaign. AIO readiness: decent, Wikipedia presence, major press, award coverage. Own site: akqa.com is fairly rich (work, studios, news). Score maybe 65-75.

Now the metrics:

brand_known: true.

confidence: maybe 82.

mentions_out_of_10: In buyer-intent questions like "best marketing agency", "top digital experience agencies", "Accenture Song alternatives", "is AKQA any good", "AKQA vs VML", "top WPP digital agencies", "agencies specializing in digital design", how many would name AKQA? For generic "best marketing agency" queries, AKQA might be named when focusing on digital experience/innovation. Realistically maybe 5-6 out of 10 would name AKQA. Let me think: 10 questions: "best digital experience agencies", "top creative digital agencies", "is AKQA good", "AKQA reviews", "AKQA alternatives", "AKQA vs Accenture Song", "best agencies for consumer brand digital campaigns", "top WPP agencies", "award-winning digital agencies", "best agency for brand innovation". AKQA would be named in most of these, maybe 6-7. But for broad "marketing / agency provider" shopping, AKQA competes with many names; generic queries often list: Wieden+Kennedy, Droga5, Ogilvy, BBDO, DDB, Accenture Song, R/GA, Huge, VML, Monks, AKQA sometimes. I'd say mentions_out_of_10 = 6.

indexed_pages: I've "encountered" akqa.com pages, homepage, work pages, news. Realistically I have some knowledge of the site structure: akqa.com homepage, /work, /studios, /news, specific case study pages (e.g., akqa.com/work/nike...). Genuinely encountered? I can claim some familiarity: homepage plus a handful of work/news pages. Say indexed_pages = 12? Or be conservative: 5-10. I'd say 8. Must not invent precise figures I can't justify, "number" fine, approximate. 8 seems plausible-ish but is it justifiable? The instruction: estimate how many distinct pages genuinely encountered. I can say ~10. Let me use 10.

visibility_score: 0-100. AKQA is well-known in industry but niche; global presence. Maybe 65.

google_aio_score: Wikipedia page exists, major trade press coverage, awards coverage, good citability. Maybe 70.

share_of_voice_pct: In a competitor set of ~10 names for digital experience agency queries, AKQA maybe occupies ~10-15% of brand-name slots. If competitors list: Accenture Song, Deloitte Digital, Publicis Sapient, Monks, VML, R/GA, Huge, Razorfish, Dept, Wieden+Kennedy, and AKQA, AKQA would occupy maybe 10-12%. I'll say 12.

rank_among_competitors: within that digital experience set, AKQA maybe top 5? In brand recognition among digital experience specialists, AKQA is arguably top 5 (with Accenture Song, R/GA, Huge, Monks, VML). Say rank 4 or 5. I'll say 5.

competitors list: ["Accenture Song", "Deloitte Digital", "Publicis Sapient", "Monks (Media.Monks)", "R/GA", "VML", "Huge", "Razorfish", "Dept", "Wieden+Kennedy"]. Maybe trim to 8-10.

sentiment: positive.

would_recommend: true.

sources: Only list URLs I'm confident exist. https://akqa.com (homepage), confident. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKQA, I believe it exists (yes, AKQA has a Wikipedia article). Campaign/AdAge specific article URLs, risky; avoid. Maybe https://www.akqa.com/work, does that path exist? AKQA site structure: akqa.com/work or /work? I recall akqa.com has pages like akqa.com/work. Hmm, risk. Safer: only homepage and Wikipedia. Two sources are fine; empty array is better than fabricated links, but homepage + Wikipedia are safe.

reasoning: one-two sentences naming concrete evidence: Wikipedia article, WPP ownership, Cannes Lions award history, trade press coverage (Campaign, Ad Age, The Drum), well-known Nike work, but niche B2B brand awareness vs consumer.

Wait, I need to be careful about whether AKQA is still part of WPP given 2025 restructuring with Grey. My training may include mid-2025 data. The Grey-AKQA merger: I recall reports around September 2025 that WPP would merge AKQA with Grey under "Grey" umbrella, forming a combined network led by Grey's CEO Michael Houston. Actually I think the announcement: "WPP to combine Grey and AKQA", yes, I believe in late

Show the exact prompt sent to GLM

You are an AI answer engine being audited on how you talk about a brand. Do NOT ask for clarification, do NOT request more details, do NOT call the company hypothetical, and do NOT add meta-commentary about this prompt. Brand: AKQA Website: https://akqa.com Industry: Marketing / Agency Products/Services: Digital design, experience, and marketing Location / Target market: Global Your reply MUST have exactly two parts, in this order. PART 1 — ASSESSMENT (prose, under 220 words) Assess this brand SPECIFICALLY in the Global market: its visibility and reputation there, market position and main competitors, products/services, what people in that market say about it, notable strengths or concerns, and whether you would recommend it to someone in Global seeking Marketing / Agency solutions. If the brand is global, still weight the assessment toward Global. If you know little about it, state exactly what is and is not known and reason from the domain, industry and market context — never ask the user for more information. PART 2 — METRICS (mandatory, machine-read) Before writing the metrics, silently run this procedure: a) Write 10 realistic buyer-intent questions someone in Global would ask when shopping in the Marketing / Agency category (for example "best Marketing / Agency provider", "Digital design, experience, and marketing alternatives", "is AKQA any good"). Count how many of those 10 you would answer with AKQA actually named — that number is mentions_out_of_10. b) Estimate how many distinct pages of https://akqa.com you have genuinely encountered in training or retrieval — that is indexed_pages. If you have effectively never seen the domain, use 0. c) List the real competitors you would name in those answers, then work out what share of the total brand-name slots AKQA would occupy (share_of_voice_pct) and its rank within that set. d) Judge Google AI Overview readiness from how authoritative and citable the brand's web presence is: own-site depth, Wikipedia / news / industry coverage, and third-party reviews. Rules for the numbers. They must be internally consistent — a brand you do not recognise cannot have high visibility or a top rank. Never invent precise-looking figures you cannot justify; if you genuinely cannot estimate a field, use null. Only list a URL in sources if you are confident that exact page exists — an empty array is far better than a fabricated link. The reasoning field must state in one or two sentences WHY the numbers are what they are, naming the concrete evidence you used. Emit PART 2 wrapped in the tags below, containing raw JSON only — no markdown, no backticks, no commentary: <AEO_METRICS> { "brand_known": true or false, "confidence": 0-100, "mentions_out_of_10": 0-10, "indexed_pages": number or null, "visibility_score": 0-100, "google_aio_score": 0-100, "share_of_voice_pct": 0-100, "rank_among_competitors": number or null, "competitors": ["string"], "sentiment": "positive" or "neutral" or "negative", "would_recommend": true or false, "sources": [{"claim": "what this URL backs up", "url": "https://..."}], "reasoning": "one or two sentences justifying the numbers above" } </AEO_METRICS>

Frequently Asked Questions

4
Is AKQA optimized for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO)?

AKQA scores 1162 on BrandAEO's independent open-scale Answer Engine Optimization assessment, indicating strong visibility and recommendation strength when AI models answer marketing / agency questions.

How do AI models like ChatGPT and Gemini see AKQA?

BrandAEO evaluated AKQA across 5 AI answer engines (OpenAI, Gemini, Perplexity, DeepSeek, Qwen) and 10 visibility dimensions (each scored 0-30). AKQA currently has an Overall Score of 1162, indicating strong presence and recommendation strength when AI models answer marketing / agency questions.

What is AKQA's AEO score?

AKQA's Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) Overall Score is 1162 on BrandAEO's open scale — the sum of 10 visibility dimensions each scored 0-30 — an independent assessment of how visible, accurately described, and frequently recommended AKQA is inside AI-generated answers.

How can AKQA improve its visibility in AI answers?

AKQA can improve its AEO score by strengthening authoritative citations, publishing clear structured content about its products, earning third-party mentions, and ensuring consistent, accurate brand information across the web that AI engines can retrieve and cite.