GEO vs AEO vs AI SEO: what the terms mean

The terms at a glance

Generative engine optimisation (GEO)

GEO has the clearest origin. It comes from a research paper, "GEO: Generative Engine Optimization", by Pranjal Aggarwal and colleagues, first posted in November 2023 and accepted at the KDD conference in 2024. The authors called AI search systems "generative engines" and tested ways of rewriting content so those engines would show more of it.

The paper's headline claim is that its methods "can boost visibility by up to 40% in generative engine responses". Two cautions before you quote that in a sales deck:

• It was measured on the authors' own benchmark and test systems, not on today's ChatGPT or Gemini.
• "Up to" is carrying a lot. The paper itself says the effect "varies across domains".

It is a useful paper and a fair starting point. It is not proof that any agency can lift your business by 40%.

"GEO" has one practical flaw: it already means "geographic" to most marketers. Say "we do GEO targeting" in a meeting and half the room will hear something else.

Answer engine optimisation (AEO)

AEO is the older term. It grew up around featured snippets, "People also ask" boxes and voice assistants: places where a search engine gives one answer, not ten links. The advice was to work out the question, answer it in the first sentence, and mark it up.

When chat assistants arrived, the term stretched to cover them. Some people now use AEO for everything AI-related. Others keep it for short direct answers and use GEO for longer AI-written ones. There is no referee.

AI SEO and LLM SEO

These are the plain-speaking versions. "AI SEO" is what most business owners actually type, which is a good reason to use it. Its weakness is that it also means "using AI to do SEO", such as having a chatbot write your blog posts. That is a different thing, and often the opposite of helpful.

"LLM SEO" names the technology (large language models). It is accurate and nobody outside the industry says it.

Agent SEO

This is the term I use, for two reasons. First, it describes the reader: an AI agent working on someone's behalf. Second, it looks ahead. Answering questions is today's use. Agents that compare, book and buy are arriving, and they need the same things from a website, only more so: facts they can rely on, prices they can read, actions they can take.

It is still the same discipline. If you prefer GEO or AEO, we are talking about the same work.

Do the differences matter?

Barely. Strip away the labels and every version comes down to the same list:

1. Let the AI crawlers reach your pages.
2. Be in the search indexes the assistants use.
3. State your facts clearly, in text and in structured data.
4. Answer real questions in passages that can be quoted.
5. Be mentioned accurately elsewhere on the web.
6. Check what the assistants say, and repeat.

Here is the view from the companies that run the engines.

Google says that optimising for its generative AI features "is still SEO". Its guidance lists things you do not need: new machine-readable files, special schema, or content chopped into small pieces for AI. It also warns site owners to weigh third-party AEO and GEO advice carefully, noting that no outside tool has access to its internal systems.

Microsoft says "traditional SEO fundamentals still matter", then adds advice specific to AI answers: clear headings, questions paired with direct answers, lists and tables, and schema markup.

So the engine owners agree on the foundation and differ a little on the extras. That is the honest state of things in November 2026.

How to judge anyone selling this (me included)

The field is new enough that a confident voice can pass for expertise. A few tests:

• Do they guarantee placements? Nobody can. Assistants choose their own sources.
• Do they show how they measure? You should see the actual questions asked and the answers that came back.
• Do they cite the platforms' own documentation? OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft and Perplexity all publish guidance. Advice that contradicts it needs strong evidence.
• Do they say what is unproven? A good deal is. I would be wary of anyone who claims otherwise.
• Is the first step a check of what is actually wrong? If the first step is a twelve-month contract, walk.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between GEO and AEO?

In strict use, AEO aims to be the single direct answer, such as a featured snippet or voice reply, and GEO aims to be cited inside a longer AI-written answer. In everyday use the two are interchangeable, and both rely on the same work.

Is GEO replacing SEO?

No. AI assistants depend on search indexes to find pages, so SEO remains the foundation. Google describes optimising for its AI features as "still SEO". GEO adds a layer on top; it does not replace what is underneath.

Which term should I use?

Use whichever your audience understands. "AI SEO" is the most widely recognised by business owners. "GEO" is common among marketers. I use "Agent SEO" because it describes who is reading your website.

Who invented the term generative engine optimisation?

The term comes from the paper "GEO: Generative Engine Optimization" by Pranjal Aggarwal, Vishvak Murahari, Tanmay Rajpurohit, Ashwin Kalyan, Karthik Narasimhan and Ameet Deshpande, first posted to arXiv in November 2023 and accepted at KDD 2024.

Sources

• Aggarwal et al., GEO: Generative Engine Optimization, arXiv, November 2023; KDD 2024.
• Google Search Central, Optimizing your website for generative AI features on Google Search. Checked 10 November 2026.
• Google Search Central, AI features and your website. Checked 10 November 2026.
• Microsoft Advertising, Optimizing your content for inclusion in AI search answers, 8 October 2025.