We respect your privacy.

We use strictly necessary cookies to keep you signed in and to protect against CSRF. With your permission we also use a small amount of first-party analytics to improve the product. We do not sell your data and we do not use third-party advertising trackers. See our cookie policy and privacy policy .

Home/Research/The AI-Readiness Report: the top 1,000 sites, three signals

Crawlmind Research

The AI-Readiness Report: the top 1,000 sites, three signals

Published 2026-08-25 · by the Crawlmind research team

As of August 2026, only 10.7% of the web's top 1,000 sites are fully AI-ready: they let the major AI crawlers in, publish a spec-shaped llms.txt, and emit JSON-LD an AI crawler can read without running JavaScript. 24.6% block at least one major AI crawler in robots.txt, only 14.3% publish a valid llms.txt, and 44% emit homepage JSON-LD. The starkest split is by category: social (82%) and news (70%) block AI crawlers, while SaaS (8%) and developer tools (5%) welcome them, and SaaS is the only category that is broadly AI-ready (40%).

10.7%

fully AI-ready

24.6%

block ≥1 AI crawler

82%

of social sites block AI

60%

open to AI but no llms.txt

What we measured

We took the Tranco top 1,000 hostnames and, for each, fetched /robots.txt, /llms.txt, and the homepage exactly as a non-JavaScript AI crawler would: raw HTML, no rendering. 561 served a reachable homepage (the rest are CDN, DNS, and cloud endpoints that do not host a browsable site). For each reachable site we recorded three things: which major AI crawlers (GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, CCBot, Bytespider) are blocked at the root; whether an llms.txt exists and is spec-shaped (a title, sections, and links); and whether the homepage emits JSON-LD structured data.

Only 10.7% are fully AI-ready

We call a site "fully AI-ready" when it clears all three bars: it does not block the AI crawlers, it publishes a valid llms.txt, and it emits JSON-LD an engine can read. Just 10.7% of the top 1,000 clear it. The signals rarely line up: 60% are open to AI crawlers but publish no llms.txt, leaving the engine to guess which pages matter, and a smaller 1.4% publish an llms.txt yet still block an AI crawler, inviting engines to a door they have locked.

Who blocks the AI crawlers

Block rates split sharply by category:

CategoryBlocks ≥1 AI crawlerValid llms.txtFully AI-readySites
Social82.4%0%0%17
News70.4%11.1%11.1%27
Media / streaming40.0%10.0%10.0%10
E-commerce23.1%15.4%15.4%13
SaaS8.0%48.0%40.0%25
Developer5.4%10.8%8.1%37
Reference / edu5.3%0%0%19

The pattern is the story of the AI-content fight in one table: publishers and social platforms are pulling up the drawbridge; SaaS and developer tools are throwing it open. SaaS is the only category that is broadly AI-ready (40%), which tracks with the incentive: those companies want to be the answer an AI engine gives.

Which bots get blocked

Block rates per crawler, across all 561 reachable sites:

CrawlerBlocked at root
CCBot21.2%
Bytespider20.1%
ClaudeBot18.9%
GPTBot18.4%
Google-Extended17.3%
PerplexityBot14.6%
ChatGPT-User12.8%
OAI-SearchBot10.9%

The most-blocked bots are the broad training and scraper crawlers (CCBot, Bytespider), then the model crawlers (ClaudeBot, GPTBot). The dedicated search-citation bots are blocked least: OAI-SearchBot, the crawler that puts you in ChatGPT search results, is the least-blocked of all at 10.9%. Operators are more willing to be cited than to be trained on.

The llms.txt gap

Only 14.3% publish a valid llms.txt (16.8% publish one at all; the rest are malformed or soft-404s). The gap between "open to AI" and "publishes an llms.txt" is the biggest missed opportunity in the data: 60% of sites let the crawlers in but never hand them a map. Publishing one takes a few minutes. Validate yours free or generate one from your sitemap.

What this means for you

Being cited by AI starts with being readable by it: let the crawlers in, tell them where the answers are (llms.txt), and mark up the page (JSON-LD). It is necessary, not sufficient, since authority still decides who actually gets cited. But with only 10.7% of the top of the web clearing that bar, most of your competitors have not, which makes it one of the cheapest edges available. Check your site free.

Methodology

Tranco top-1,000 (list 38LNL) as of 2026-08-25. /robots.txt, /llms.txt, and the homepage fetched with User-Agent: CrawlmindResearchBot/1.0, follow redirects, no JavaScript rendering (mirroring how AI crawlers fetch). 561 of 1,000 served a reachable homepage; percentages are over reachable sites. "Blocked" = an explicit Disallow: / for the bot user-agent with no Allow: / override. "Valid llms.txt" = an H1 title, at least one H2 section, and at least one markdown link, excluding HTML soft-200s. Homepage JSON-LD counted from raw HTML only. Categories assigned by a heuristic classifier (known-domain map + keyword/TLD rules); small categories (social n=17, news n=27) are directional, not definitive. Script + raw data: scripts/research/ai-readiness-scan.mjs; contact [email protected].

See how your site is positioned

Run a free Crawlmind audit: every page graded for AI discoverability.