SEO
- A ranked link on a results page
- Position for a keyword
- Crawlable pages, internal links, keywords where they belong
- Rankings and organic sessions, usually monthly
- Clear writing, real authority, a site crawlers can read
Someone with a problem describes it to ChatGPT or Perplexity in full sentences, the way they'd describe it to a colleague. They get back one answer with a few companies named inside it. Those companies get the visit, the shortlist spot, and the pipeline. There's no page two.
SEO vs AEO: how the two tactics differ
Partly, and it costs nothing to admit it. The inputs overlap almost entirely: a crawlable site, real authority, writing that answers the question it raises. If you did SEO well, you already built a solid foundation. What moved is the target. A results page has room for a long list and sends real traffic to more than the top result. An AI answer names a few sources and gives everyone else silence. Some of the work is genuinely new: schema and llms.txt written for AI crawlers, pages built so a lifted passage still makes sense on its own, and research into the questions buyers ask assistants.
Conversational search demand behaves differently from keyword demand. A buyer no longer types two words and scans ten links. They ask which platforms let a marketing team publish pages without engineers, and what the tradeoffs are. The question carries context, constraints, and intent, so the answer can be specific, and often final. Many of these questions never reach a results page at all. Which means visibility has a new unit. It's no longer position for a keyword. It's how often the engines cite you or recommend you across the questions your buyers ask. If you only watch rankings, this whole layer of demand is invisible to you while a competitor takes it.
ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, Gemini, Claude, and Copilot: software that reads the web and composes one answer instead of returning a list of links. They read your pages, your structure and schema, and what other credible sources say about you. When they answer a question, they pick a handful of sources to cite or recommend: passages that answer the question cleanly, facts that stay consistent across the web, companies with real evidence of doing what they claim. No engine publishes its rules, and the rules keep moving. What holds across all of them is simple: they quote what they can read and trust, and they skip what they can't parse.
Our portfolio encompasses a wide range of digital designs essential for the growth of modern businesses.
Lazarev.agency is more than about making profits for us and our clients. We're committed to saving lives in Ukraine, taking on pro bono projects, championing diversity, equity, and inclusion.
in funding secured for our clients
awards backing our excellence
founded, 10+ years of experience
AI product design agency
from user research to production-ready design systems
Among our clients:
We’re a UX/UI web design agency with 120+ awards that helps AI‑native and AI‑ambitious B2B teams translate complex products into clear, conversion‑ready websites.
Webby Awards x10
Red Dot Design Award x6
Awwwards x16
FWA x5
We exist for B2B teams under pressure to turn an AI roadmap into visible product usage, expansion, and a safer story in front of the C‑suite and investors. If design isn’t moving revenue, adoption, or retention, it’s decoration. We design to avoid that. Since 2015, we’ve shipped 600+ products and earned 120+ awards for work on complex, data-heavy tools: fintech platforms, AI copilots, decision engines, and vertical SaaS. Our work has helped clients turn “we have AI features” into “our customers actually use and pay for them.”
We started designing AI products in 2017, long before “AI-native” became a buzzword. With 30+ AI products shipped, we focus on the hard part most teams struggle with: making complex intelligence feel simple, trustworthy, and obviously valuable in a demo, a POC, or a QBR. We’re a 40+ person team of UX strategists, product designers, and analysts who treat design as a business function.
What sets us apart from a typical agency or a single in-house hire is pattern recognition at scale. We’ve seen what works – and what quietly kills adoption – across hundreds of AI and data-heavy products. That lets us spot failure modes early, bring proven interaction patterns to your team, and reduce the risk that your next AI release is another unused toggle in a settings menu.
We start with research not because it’s “best practice,” but because designing without understanding your users, your market, and your revenue model is just guessing with nicer pixels. From there, we collaborate with your product, AI, and design leaders to define where AI should show up, how it should behave, and how to make it obvious, safe, and monetizable.
If you’re a Head of AI, Product, or an AI-native founder who needs AI capabilities to be seen, understood, and used now, not someday, we’re built to be that partner.
At this stage, clients engage us for 4–6+ month AI & data product UX redesign programs, treating us as their primary product design partner for the core platform.
of experience in UI/UX design
Trusted by over 1,000 companies of all sizes
international industry awards
projects successfully completed
Measures the starting line: which engines cite you today, who wins the answers in your category, and where the gaps are.
Maps the questions your buyers ask, clusters them by intent, and makes the platform call: what your site needs before content can compound.
Gives citations a site to stand on: machine-readable, fast to publish on, run by the marketing team.
Keeps citations accruing month after month: question discovery, steady publishing, technical upkeep, and a dashboard showing share of voice any day you open it.
How we work, scale, and deliver measurable outcomes.
Through the three doors above: a citation in an answer, a recommendation in a comparison, or an agent reading your site on a buyer's behalf. All three reward the same preparation — a site machines can parse, pages written so a passage survives being lifted out, and evidence that backs what you claim. There's no separate trick for each engine.
Partly, and the check tells you exactly how far. Schema, llms.txt, and structural fixes retrofit onto most platforms, and strategy work doesn't care where your site lives. The ceiling is publishing speed: citations follow pages, and if every page takes weeks to publish, the cadence dies. That's the point where the build conversation starts, and not before.
Share of voice: across the questions your buyers ask, how often you get cited by AI engines versus named competitors, tracked live instead of reported monthly. Alongside it, referral traffic from the engines and what it converts into, so the graph connects to pipeline.
No. The inputs overlap, so work earning citations tends to help rankings too. What changes is where demand shows up: a growing share of buying questions gets answered inside the engines and never reaches a results page. Measuring only rankings doesn't lose you that demand. It hides who's winning it.
Let's talk about your AI adoption challenge