Kuroma
AI Readiness benchmark for Wealth Management / Investment
Across 214 audited domains we have classified as Wealth Management / Investment, the median AI Readiness score is 39 out of 100. That is level with the median for all 30,738 audited domains in the corpus.
How the scores are distributed
Half of the 214 audited Wealth Management / Investment domains score between 33 and 47. The corpus-wide interquartile range, across all 30,738 audited domains, is 32 to 45.
Which factors this industry fails most often
The rubric scores 19 factors. A factor counts as failed here when a site scores below 50 out of 100 on it. The last column is how many audits each rate was calculated from. Question Coverage & FAQ Presence and Media Accessibility are not scored on every kind of page: a rankings table or a paginated index has no question to answer and no image to caption. E-E-A-T Signals, Citation-Worthiness and Question Coverage & FAQ Presence lean on English-language patterns, so on a page written in another language they are scored out of a smaller total. Those rows therefore leave out every audit of a page the factor was not scored on the same scale, and every audit that did not record enough about the page for us to tell. Every other row counts every audit in this industry that scored the factor.
| Factor | Fails in Wealth Management / Investment | Fails corpus-wide | Difference | Audits counted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-E-A-T Signals Authority Signals · 7% of the total score · counted only on pages in a language it measures in full |
96% | 89% | +7 | 67 |
| Structured Data Quality On-Page Content · 4.5% of the total score |
91% | 96% | -5 | 214 |
| Citation-Worthiness AI Readiness · 7.5% of the total score · counted only on pages in a language it measures in full |
90% | 94% | -4 | 67 |
| Unique Value Proposition AI Readiness · 5.1% of the total score |
90% | 94% | -4 | 214 |
| Question Coverage & FAQ Presence On-Page Content · 6.5% of the total score · counted only on pages this factor applies to, in a language it measures in full |
88% | 85% | +3 | 64 |
| Trust & Brand Signals Authority Signals · 9% of the total score |
80% | 74% | +6 | 214 |
| External Citations & References Authority Signals · 9% of the total score |
77% | 83% | -6 | 214 |
| Media Accessibility On-Page Content · 1.8% of the total score · counted only on pages this factor applies to |
77% | 87% | -10 | 190 |
| Schema Markup Completeness Technical Optimization · 1% of the total score |
69% | 63% | +6 | 214 |
| Answer Box Potential AI Readiness · 7.2% of the total score |
64% | 68% | -4 | 214 |
| Crawlability & Accessibility Technical Optimization · 13% of the total score |
53% | 46% | +7 | 214 |
| Content Freshness AI Readiness · 5.7% of the total score |
46% | 49% | -3 | 214 |
| AI Discoverability AI Readiness · 3% of the total score |
43% | 34% | +9 | 214 |
| Heading Hierarchy On-Page Content · 2.8% of the total score |
26% | 28% | -2 | 214 |
| Raw HTML Availability AI Readiness · 1.5% of the total score |
24% | 24% | 0 | 214 |
| Content Depth & Comprehensiveness On-Page Content · 6.5% of the total score |
18% | 14% | +4 | 214 |
| Page Performance Indicators Technical Optimization · 2% of the total score |
18% | 20% | -2 | 214 |
| Mobile Optimization Technical Optimization · 4% of the total score |
17% | 14% | +3 | 214 |
| AI Readability Score On-Page Content · 3% of the total score |
6% | 8% | -2 | 204 |
Where Wealth Management / Investment diverges from everyone else
Relative to the whole corpus, this industry is distinctively weak on AI Discoverability (+9 points), E-E-A-T Signals (+7 points), Crawlability & Accessibility (+7 points).
It is distinctively strong on Media Accessibility (-10 points), External Citations & References (-6 points), Structured Data Quality (-5 points).
AI Discoverability: fails on 43% of the 214 Wealth Management / Investment audits it was measured on
Rescoped to on-page machine-readability signals (semantic HTML, licensing clarity). The dead ai-plugin manifest check was removed and llms.txt stays informational only, because no major engine reads it.
E-E-A-T Signals: fails on 96% of the 67 Wealth Management / Investment audits it was measured on
No study tests author bios as a causal AI-citation lever; the real authority channel is off-site brand footprint. On-page bylines and dates are kept as best-practice hygiene at reduced weight.
Crawlability & Accessibility: fails on 53% of the 214 Wealth Management / Investment audits it was measured on
The strongest technical factor: blocking a visibility crawler verifiably removes a site from that engine's answers, and OpenAI documents this directly. Scoring uses a bot-class matrix so only visibility-bot blocks count against the score; training-bot blocks are a policy choice reported neutrally.
Audited Wealth Management / Investment sites with a public report card
Each of these sites has a public AI Readiness report card from a real audit. Scores are point-in-time; the card shows what was measured and when.
| Site | Grade | Score | Audited |
|---|---|---|---|
| NerdWallet (nerdwallet.com) | Grade A | 68/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| 海外FXおすすめ業者ランキング比較【2026年8月最新】証券外務員一種保有者監修の人気口座13選 (sec.kazaka.jp) | Grade A | 66/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| Stocktwits (stocktwits.com) | Grade A | 66/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| TradingView (tradingview.com) | Grade A | 66/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| Betterment (betterment.com) | Grade A | 64/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| 投資信託で資産運用するならニッセイアセットマネジメント (www.nam.co.jp) | Grade A | 64/100 | 16 Sep 2026 |
| interactivebrokers.com | Grade A | 63/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| 三菱UFJ eスマート証券（旧社名 (kabu.com) | Grade A | 63/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| Morningstar (morningstar.com) | Grade A | 63/100 | 20 Aug 2026 |
| 東京海上アセットマネジメントBack ButtonSearch IconFilter Icon (www.tokiomarineam.co.jp) | Grade A | 58/100 | 16 Sep 2026 |
| 株式会社ミドルウッド MiddleWood Hotel & Resort (middlewood.jp) | Grade B | 57/100 | 15 Sep 2026 |
| 求人広告 (naito.jp) | Grade B | 57/100 | 15 Sep 2026 |
Browse every audited site in the public audit archive.
See the full ranked list of 46 Wealth Management / Investment sites →
How to read this
- What the sample is. The 214 domains we have audited and classified as Wealth Management / Investment. That is a sample of the industry, not a census: it is the set of sites our crawler has reached and scored, and it carries whatever bias that selection has.
- Rubric version 2026-08-13. Every figure here comes from audits scored on this single rubric generation. Scores from different generations measure different things, so they are never mixed. Compatible generations: 2026-08-13.
- Why there are no company names. These are aggregates. We do not publish which domains sit at the bottom of a distribution, and the queries behind this page cannot return a domain name.
- Publishing floor. We publish an industry only once it reaches 100 audited domains, and a factor's failure rate only once 30 audits in the industry count toward that factor. Below either floor the number would move with a handful of sites, so we withhold it.
- What the audit can and cannot see. This audit measures citation readiness: how easily AI engines can crawl, extract, and quote these pages. It cannot see the off-site brand footprint (mentions, reviews, third-party coverage) that gates whether AI engines retrieve a brand at all; Kuroma's visibility scans and off-site signals track that side. Read the full methodology.