FinTech · Personal Lending.
Cited inside Perplexity Finance on 9 of 14 priority lending queries.
Strong content, anonymous authorship, no AI presence.
FinTech personal-lending brand with strong content library — 200+ articles, well-ranking on Google. But anonymous authorship, hidden compliance disclosure, no schema graph. Content was extractable but not credible by AI-engine standards.
AI Overviews launched on lending queries and traffic dropped 22% in 4 months. Worse: Perplexity Finance was citing competitor content on the same priority queries, with the brand absent from answers despite stronger Google rankings.
Compliance surfacing + expert authorship + entity work.
Audit + author plan
Content + author audit. CFA / Series 7 credentials inventory across team. Compliance-disclosure surfacing plan.
Schema + author rollout
Full schema graph deployed. Person schema for every credentialed author with regulator-listing URLs. Compliance disclosures moved above-the-fold.
Top 30 pages restructured
TL;DR blocks. Structured Q&A with regulatory context. Citable original data from internal lending portfolio.
Entity + brand-mention work
Investopedia + NerdWallet + Statista mention pursuit. Wikidata entry for the firm. Quarterly research piece on lending portfolio data.
We had the content — what we didn't have was the AI-quotable structure. Surfacing CFA credentials and compliance copy felt counterintuitive. Then Perplexity started citing us on 9 of our 14 priority queries.
90 days post-restructure.
Same measurement method used for both windows. Numbers pulled from primary platform sources at write-up. Editorial standard at /about/editorial-standards/.
Stack we shipped.
Common questions about this engagement.
How was the FinTech · Personal Lending result measured?+
Per the methodology callout above: a baseline window of 90 days pre-engagement compared against a result window of 90 days post-engagement using last-touch attribution sourced from primary platforms (GA4, Shopify, Stripe, ad-platform UIs, Klaviyo where applicable). The same measurement method is used for both windows; we do not change attribution mid-engagement to make the result look better.
What was the time-to-result?+
For FinTech · Personal Lending, the bulk of the lift landed within the engagement window shown in the approach timeline. Compounding effects on slower-cycle channels (organic SEO, AEO citation share, lifecycle list growth) typically continue accruing for 6–12 months after the active engagement closes. We do not publish "uplift" numbers from a single inflated week; the result is the steady-state measurement window.
Could you replicate this for my brand?+
Honest answer: depends on category fit, current baseline, and execution discipline. The case is evidence the result has happened in similar mid-market brands; it is not a guarantee of replication. Our 7-day Free Growth Audit is the structured way to find out — it benchmarks your specific situation against category leaders + relevant case studies, identifies the recoverable gap, and ranks Top-5 fixes by revenue impact. The audit is delivered free regardless of whether you go on to engage.
Is the brand identifiable, and can I get a reference?+
FinTech · Personal Lending is anonymised under mutual NDA — most mid-market brands will not attach their name to public revenue numbers, and our NDA terms typically prohibit it. Reference contacts (real, reachable people who worked on this engagement) are available on request after counter-NDA, returned within 48 working hours of brief acceptance. The published metrics are pulled from primary platform sources at the time of write-up; the editorial standards are at /about/editorial-standards/ and the case-studies policy is at /about/case-studies-policy/.
Get a FinTech AEO audit.
Submit your domain. We benchmark Perplexity Finance + ChatGPT visibility, author-credential coverage, and compliance-signal surfacing. Top 5 fixes inside 7 days.