A two-phase plan for perfectly.so, with delivery-verifiable acceptance criteria for each phase. All diagnostic figures were pulled independently on August 22–23, 2026, without access to your analytics or Search Console.
An AI-native growth marketing agency. We work on four things: search visibility across both Google and AI assistants, influencer and creator distribution, media placement, and reputation management.
Search & AI visibility specialist
ChatGPT returns HashMatrix as its first recommendation for "fastest growing SaaS SEO agency," and Google's AI Overview cites 大罗 SEO among notable search experts.
Test it yourself, and test the harder phrasings too — head-term coverage is what this plan builds toward and nobody owns all of it. What these show is the mechanism working end to end on a live brand.
Pulled independently on August 22–23, 2026, from third-party crawl, backlink and SERP datasets, WHOIS, and live recommendation tests run against ChatGPT and Perplexity. Sources and method are stated at the end of this section.
| Metric | perfectly.so | Source & type |
|---|---|---|
| Referring domains | 64 | Internal Data Source, backlink index — measured |
| Total backlinks | 240 | Internal Data Source — measured |
| Domain rank (0–100) | 26 | Internal Data Source rank. Not Ahrefs DR — the two indices differ and are not interchangeable |
| Crawled pages | 5 | Internal Data Source, crawl — measured |
| US organic keywords | 12 | 24 including subdomains; 3 brand-relevant — measured |
| Est. monthly organic traffic | ~12 visits | Modelled, not measured. Search Console will replace this with the real number on day one |
| Domain age | ~12 months | WHOIS, registered 2025-08-08 — measured |
| Third-party review profiles | 0 | Search across G2 / Capterra / Trustpilot — no listing found |
| AI recommendation appearance | 0 of 3 runs | ChatGPT gpt-5.4 ×2, Perplexity sonar-pro ×1, web search on, Aug 23 2026 — measured, small sample |
Method. Everything above was pulled without access to your analytics or Search Console, which means the traffic figure is a model estimate and should be treated as one. Ranking positions come from a depersonalized US index and will differ from what you see in your own browser, where location and history apply — on our call the live checks showed positions 3 and 5 for the brand query against the index's 1. Both are correct measurements of different things. Before anything is contracted, one tool is named and used for both baseline and reporting so this ambiguity does not reach the acceptance criteria.
The AI result is three runs, not a study. It is enough to say Perfectly is not currently being recommended, and enough to identify what the models cite. It is not enough to quantify a share-of-voice number, which is why establishing a proper baseline is the first deliverable rather than a claim in this document.
Three features of this category decide where the budget should go, and the first one decides how you read every number that follows.
AI recruiting is a category in formation, and Google search volume is the wrong instrument for measuring one. The head terms read flat to down while the list-shaped queries climb — "best ai sourcing tools for recruiters" is up 7,100% year over year and hit 720 in July, "best ai recruiting software" up 333%. That is not a category contracting; that is demand moving off the keyword box and into assistants, where no volume figure exists to count it. Our own tests confirm buyers get complete vendor recommendations there without a search ever being logged. What the keyword data still tells us reliably is commercial value, and it is high: $77 to $360 top-of-page bids. Plan against where the demand is going, not against a number that only counts where it used to be.
On "best ai sourcing tool for startups," page one is Gem's blog, Findem's blog, Recruiterflow's blog, Juicebox's own blog, a Reddit thread and three YouTube videos; three vendor homepages appear, none above position three. The AI tests point the same way: the models built their recommendations out of vendor-written listicles. Winning here means being named inside those pages, not out-publishing them.
No G2, Capterra or Trustpilot profile exists for Perfectly. These carry weight in both rankings and AI answer synthesis, and right now the highest-authority third-party page about the brand is a scam-checking site. One caveat we will resolve before you pay for it: G2 and Capterra are software marketplaces, and Perfectly sells a service. Confirming the category and eligibility is a week-one task, not an assumption.
Perfectly's buyer is a founder or head of talent at a seed to Series B startup carrying open roles without a full-time recruiter. Search reaches them at two different points, and the two need different content.
They describe the problem rather than the product: five engineers to hire, no recruiter. They ask an assistant or run a "best tools for" search, and they read the list that comes back. This is where the money is, and where Perfectly currently does not appear.
Content that catches this: third-party listicles, the YC directory, comparison pages, Reddit threads, LinkedIn commentary from people they follow.
A referral, a demo or a LinkedIn post has already happened, and before committing they check whether the brand holds up. Your YC and LinkedIn pages already do much of this work for free, which is why we treat verification as a smaller job than a typical brand-defence engagement would.
Content that catches this: review profiles, comparison-against-incumbent pages, press coverage, an owned answer to "is this company real."
Juicebox is the closest named comparison from our call. The gap decides which fights are worth picking — and the last row decides the strategy.
| Metric (US, Aug 2026, Internal Data Source) | perfectly.so | juicebox.ai | Others in the set |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain rank (0–100) | 26 | 47 | Recruiterflow 71 · Findem 70 · Gem 64 · hireEZ 64 · Fetcher 45 · Paraform 40 |
| Referring domains | 64 | 1,340 | — |
| Total backlinks | 240 | 7,694 | — |
| Crawled pages | 5 | 1,046 | — |
| Ranking organic keywords | 12 | 1,552 | — |
| Est. monthly organic traffic | ~12 | ~30,800 | — |
| Brand search demand | no clean brand term isolates* | "juicebox ai" 4,400/mo, +406% YoY | — |
| Appeared in our 3 AI recommendation runs | No | No | Dover, Pin, Ashby, hireEZ, Fetcher, Noxx and others did |
*"perfectly ai" shows 260/mo but the dataset clusters it under "perfect ai" and flags it as another language, so it is contaminated by other brands and we will not present it as your demand. Clean brand terms are small: "perfectly so" 20/mo, "perfectly recruiting" 20/mo.
The last row is the important one. Juicebox has twenty times your referring domains, two hundred times your indexed pages, and a thousand times your organic traffic — and it was absent from the same three AI answers you were absent from. Domain authority alone is not what gets a brand into an AI recommendation. Being named inside the specific pages those models retrieve is. That is a far cheaper target than out-building Juicebox, and it is why this plan front-loads placement rather than link volume.
On metric sources. These come from our internal data source. Ahrefs indexes the web differently and will show different numbers for the same sites — on Ahrefs, Juicebox reads materially higher than the figures above. Neither is wrong; they are different crawls of the same web. Whichever tool you prefer, we name it in the contract and use it for both the baseline and every monthly report, so the two indices never end up on opposite sides of an acceptance criterion.
Two phases. Phase 1 puts Perfectly into the pages that buyers and assistants already read, and closes the trust gaps a buyer hits after a referral. Phase 2 compounds that into owned ranking positions. The order follows the evidence in section 04: placement is what moves AI answers, and it is available now; domain authority takes years and would not have helped Juicebox anyway.
Objective: Perfectly is named inside the listicles, directories and review platforms that currently supply both page-one results and AI recommendations — and a buyer who searches the brand name after a referral finds substance rather than a scam-checker.
Objective: convert the citation surface built in Phase 1 into ranking positions and AI appearances Perfectly owns, rather than rents.
You told us your acceptance criteria were unclear. This is the part that usually stays vague, so here it is in full, and it becomes a contract appendix rather than a promise in a slide.
Indicative timing for the recommended tier. Exact volumes per month are set at kickoff.
129-point technical audit. Review platform eligibility answered in writing. Baselines recorded for the brand query set, the AI prompt set, commercial-intent rankings and referring domains, in the named tool. Domain variant list handed over.
Listicle placements. YC and ecosystem build-out. Review profiles populated. Verification pages shipped. Site structure and internal linking. First press placement. AI protocol running from cycle one.
Comparison and alternative content. Higher placement volume. Reddit and community. Relevance-targeted links. Expanded prompt coverage. LinkedIn creator distribution.
Commercial-intent rankings mature as authority accrues. AI appearance rate reported against the month-1 baseline with intervals. Non-brand sessions and demo requests become the primary read.
Why the two channels are bought together rather than sequentially.
Buyers increasingly describe a problem to an assistant instead of typing keywords. "Five engineers to hire and no recruiter" never reaches a results page, and a brand absent from the sources the model retrieves never enters the answer.
A results page has ten slots and a second page. The AI answers we ran named three to six companies and stopped. You are in the cited set or you are invisible; there is no partial credit for ranking eleventh.
Assistants converge on sources they already retrieve. Dover appeared as the top recommendation because Dover publishes the list the model read. Whoever occupies those pages gets cited repeatedly, and each citation reinforces the next.
The common assumption is that authority carries you into AI recommendations. Our own test says otherwise, and that changes where the budget goes.
1,340 referring domains, 1,046 indexed pages, 30,800 monthly visits — absent from all three runs. If domain strength were the gate, Juicebox would have cleared it.
Every company named in those answers appeared because it was written into a page the model fetched: a vendor listicle, a directory, a category roundup. That is the mechanism, and it is purchasable now.
Authority still matters — it decides Google rankings and whether publishers and platforms take you seriously. It is the slower half. Buying it first would spend a year before the AI channel moved at all.
Paid acquisition stops the day the budget stops. Search and AI visibility accumulate: SEO typically takes six to nine months to take hold and then holds for two to three years, at roughly 10–30% of the cost of buying the equivalent traffic. Placement is the part that can move inside the first quarter; ranking is the part that pays back over years. That six-to-nine-month figure is also why we would rather sell you a twelve-month plan honestly than a three-month one that ends the month before the compounding starts.
We do not optimize against a generic checklist. We optimize against the factors that measurably move the specific keywords in play.
Full technical audit covering indexability, rendering, structure, internal linking and Core Web Vitals.
We measure which factors are actually deciding the SERP for your keywords right now, not which factors were decisive last year.
The same analysis drives both the Google work and the AI visibility work, so the two do not pull in different directions.
Five pillars, delivered in sequence and maintained in parallel.
Web quality audit, keyword and topic planning, dual targets for search and AI.
Site structure, internal linking, rendering. The base that serves both Google indexing and AI crawling.
On-site and off-site content built to rank and to be cited.
Authority links, Reddit brand seeding, media and press. The off-site signal LLMs check.
Prompt and topic coverage across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and AI Overview, on a visibility dashboard.
A fully managed SEO + GEO engagement run by our senior team, delivered monthly and customized to the plan above. Volumes are weighted toward off-site placement, because that is what section 04 showed actually moves AI recommendations, and because a five-page site has limited on-site surface. A line-item reconciliation against our à la carte rates is available on request — we would rather walk you through it than have you reverse-engineer it.
| Foundation SEO | GEO + SEO Integrated ★ | Full Growth Package | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly price | $5,000 / mo | $8,000 / mo | $15,000 / mo |
| Best for | Cold start, foundation only | Winning both Google and AI recommendation | Full category push |
| Strategy & technical foundation | |||
| Custom SEO / GEO growth strategy | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Topical authority planning | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| 129-point technical site audit | At kickoff, then quarterly | At kickoff, then quarterly | At kickoff, then monthly |
| Site structure & rendering fixes | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Internal linking build-out | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Live reporting dashboard | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Placement & trust (Phase 1 core) | |||
| Third-party listicle placement on page-1 ranking pages | 1 / mo | 2 / mo | 4 / mo |
| YC & ecosystem directory build-out | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Review platform eligibility finding (week 1) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Review platform setup & seeding (where eligible) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Brand query set tracking | 25 queries | 25 queries | 50 queries |
| Brand domain variant audit (list handed to you) | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Off-site content distribution | |||
| Alternative / VS / Review articles (our own, off-site) | 2 / mo | 4 / mo | 8 / mo |
| Reddit posts + comments | 6 / mo | 20 / mo | 40 / mo |
| On-site content (site framework support) | |||
| On-page optimization of existing pages | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| On-site content (verification & comparison pages) | 4 / mo | 8 / mo | 14 / mo |
| Conversion rate optimization (CRO) | — | — | ✅ |
| GEO / AEO (AI search) | |||
| GEO / AEO topic coverage | — | 5 topics (50 prompts) | 10 topics (100 prompts) |
| Languages covered | — | 1 | 2 |
| AI platform coverage | — | AI Overview / ChatGPT / Perplexity | All platforms (+ Gemini and others) |
| AEO visibility dashboard | — | ✅ | ✅ |
| Brand trust prompt audit (AI assistants) | — | Monthly | Weekly |
| Off-site authority & brand | |||
| Authority backlinks DR30+, in-category | 4 / mo | 6 / mo | 12 / mo |
| Foundation links | 20 / mo | 40 / mo | 60 / mo |
| Premium press release | — | Quarterly | Monthly |
| Contracted delivery (checked monthly) | |||
| Listicle placements live on page-1 ranking pages, cumulative at month 12 | 12 | 24 | 48 |
| AI measurement protocol (5 runs × 50 prompts, raw logs delivered) | — | ✅ | ✅ |
| Expected results (Estimate · 12 months, not guaranteed) | |||
| Keywords in positions 1–20 on the agreed commercial-intent list | 15–30 | 40–80 | 90–160 |
| Non-brand organic sessions / mo (Search Console) | 150–350 | 400–900 | 1,000–2,200 |
| AI appearance rate on your prompt set | — | 10%–20% | 15%–30% |
Expected results are estimates, not guarantees. Rankings and AI citation rates depend on category competition, product strength, asset quality and Google and LLM algorithm updates — none of which we control. No agency can promise rankings and we do not. The "contracted delivery" rows above are different: those are countable, checkable monthly, and we hold ourselves to them.
Metric definitions. Positions 1–20 are measured on a commercial-intent query list agreed before signature — not total keyword count at any position, which is inflatable with thin pages and tells you nothing. Non-brand sessions come from your Search Console, not from a third-party estimate. AI appearance rate is measured under the protocol in section 05, reported with its confidence interval. One tool is named in the contract and used for both baseline and every monthly report. Different SEO tools index the web differently and will disagree with each other; that disagreement must not be allowed anywhere near an acceptance criterion.
Term — the honest version. The minimum engagement is 3 months, billed monthly, and you can stop there. But this plan runs to twelve months and we would rather say so plainly than let you discover it in month four: at the recommended tier that is $96,000 over twelve months. Placement work should show inside the first quarter, which is what the 3-month exit is there to let you judge. Ranking and AI compounding land later. If after three months the placements have not landed and the AI baseline shows the channel is not reachable for Perfectly, the right decision is to stop, and we will say so.
Recommended tier. GEO + SEO Integrated at $8,000/mo. The $5,000 tier has no AI measurement and no press, which makes it a Google-only engagement — reasonable if you want to test us cheaply, but it excludes the channel section 04 says is winnable soonest. The $15,000 tier suits sites with large page counts and is more than a five-page site needs today.
What we need from you. Search Console and Analytics access, site edit access or a developer contact, a customer list for review seeding, and the prompt and query sets drafted by your team. Budget roughly 3–5 hours a month of founder time for review sign-off; for a four-person team that is a real cost and we would rather size it now.
Scope limits. Casino, cannabis, crypto and adult verticals are excluded from add-on link pricing. Everything published carrying the Perfectly name goes to you for approval before it goes live.
Purchased on top of any tier, or à la carte. Only the modules relevant to Perfectly's plan are listed.
Guest post or contextual text link, priced by DR band. Minimum $1,000/month budget. Links here buy relevance and citation surface; at any realistic quota they do not close the gap to a competitor publishing at Juicebox's volume, and we do not present them as if they do.
| Band | Price | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| DR30–DR50 | $280 | High relevance, permanent link |
| DR50–DR60 | $395 | High relevance, permanent link |
| DR60–DR70 | $650 | Niche edit on industry-relevant product sites |
| DR70+ | $950+ | Niche edit on well-known product sites, strongest authority effect |
Casino, cannabis, crypto and adult verticals are excluded from this pricing.
Monthly retainer covering posts and comments.
| Tier | Monthly | Volume |
|---|---|---|
| Base | $1,500 | 25 comments |
| Growth | $3,000 | 4 posts + 50 comments |
| Scale | $5,000 | 4 posts + 100 comments |
Authority media wire distribution, written by senior US journalists with SEO-optimized headlines.
Feature articles in major publications, placed through our contributor network rather than by pitching staff editors. Shorter cycle and higher hit rate than traditional PR.
What it delivers depends on the outlet, and we quote it that way. Some placements are editorial and carry a followed link; others are contributor or sponsored slots that carry a disclosure label and a nofollow link. Both are useful — the second buys brand endorsement and due-diligence cover, not link authority — and we tell you which one you are buying before you buy it. Sample placements from the last 18 months available on request.
Quoted per outlet and per piece.
Full-web monitoring, suppression of negative results, crisis response and reputation repair. Covers the scenario discussed on our call: a competitor or a single unhappy customer seeding damaging content against the brand name.
We can suppress negative results, including through legitimate takedown channels handled by US law firms we work with regularly.
Quoted on request, based on the specific situation and channels involved.
Your entire buyer base is on LinkedIn, which makes it the highest-leverage single channel for Perfectly. We work with domain experts and creators in the talent and startup operations space to place brand commentary in front of founders and heads of talent, and to feed the off-site brand signal that Google and AI assistants both read.
Quoted per campaign.
Results delivered across 200+ client engagements.
We run our own tooling for factor analysis, prompt tracking and content operations. The same architecture we discussed on the call: an agent inside the workflow, with human judgment kept in the loop for the decisions that matter.
Search visibility, influencer and creator distribution, media placement, and reputation management. For a brand-defense phase like Phase 1 this matters, because the work crosses all four and coordinating three vendors costs more than it saves.
Every metric in this plan is baselined in week 1 and re-measured on a fixed cadence against the same query and prompt sets. You can check the work without taking our word for it.
Covering both SEO-only and SEO + GEO engagements (some clients buy SEO alone). Shown anonymized or within the scope the client has authorized.
Case data shown within client authorization and anonymization limits. GEO coverage figures are ranges and shift over time as each LLM platform updates its algorithms.
Why our estimate for Perfectly is more conservative than these cases. These share-of-voice figures come from consumer and high-volume categories, where prompt sets are broad and there are many answers to appear in. Perfectly's prompt set is narrow and the answers we ran named three to six companies rather than ten, so each appearance has to be won against a much shorter list. A 10–20% appearance rate on your prompt set is a harder result than 18% on a consumer travel set, not a weaker one, and we would rather quote what we believe than what matches our best case. Multiples on this page are stated without their absolute bases; ask and we will give you absolutes with dates for any case, plus how long that client stayed.
Book a call and we will walk through the full technical diagnostic and confirm the scope and pricing for your engagement. To start, we need Search Console and Analytics access, site edit access or a developer contact, and a customer list for review seeding.
Book a call