Lehvel Research

How customers find a business when AI answers first

What published research says about how people find businesses now that search engines and AI assistants answer first, and what Lehvel measured itself. Every figure lists who was measured, when, and where it came from.

Published · Updated · Next review

The short answer

  • Google is still where most searches start, but fewer of them end in a click: in Pew's panel, people clicked a result in 8% of visits when an AI summary appeared, against 15% when none did.
  • People now also ask AI assistants. In one 2026 survey, 45% of U.S. consumers said they had used an AI tool for local business recommendations.
  • In Lehvel's early sample, AI assistants named a business in every answer when asked about it by name, and in half of the answers when asked for the best provider of its service.
  • Most of what the assistants said could not be checked against the businesses' recorded facts. The gap was missing facts more often than wrong ones.
  • Google says AI features need no special markup or files: the same crawlable, accurate, well-structured pages work for both.

Search still starts on Google, but fewer searches end in a click

The answer now often appears on the results page itself. When it does, fewer people click through to a website, and the few links inside the answer are rarely clicked.

8% vs 15%

Google users who saw an AI summary clicked a traditional search result in 8% of visits, compared with 15% of visits when no AI summary appeared.

Measured
900 U.S. adults whose browsing was tracked (Ipsos KnowledgePanel Digital); 68,879 Google searches
Dates
Published ; data from March 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Observational U.S. data from one month. It shows an association, not a cause, and predates later changes to AI Overviews.

58% lower

When an AI Overview is present, the top-ranking page's average click-through rate is 58% lower.

Measured
300,000 keywords (150,000 with an AI Overview, 150,000 informational without), from aggregated Search Console data
Dates
Published ; data from December 2023 compared with December 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
A correlational comparison on informational keywords. Queries where people want a specific business may behave differently.

61%

Organic click-through rate on queries with an AI Overview fell 61%, from 1.76% in June 2024 to 0.61% in September 2025.

Measured
3,119 search terms across 42 organizations
Dates
Published ; data from June 2024 to September 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Click-through on queries without an AI Overview also fell over the same period, so not all of the decline is caused by AI Overviews.

58.5%

58.5% of U.S. Google searches in 2024 ended without a click to any website.

Measured
Datos clickstream panel of U.S. and EU users
Dates
Published ; data from 2022 to May 2024. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Mostly predates the broad AI Overview rollout; the source now marks its own data as older.

2.5 billion

Google says AI Overviews has more than 2.5 billion monthly active users.

Measured
Google Search users worldwide, as reported by Google
Dates
Published . Checked at the source on .
Read with care
A company-reported reach figure. It counts people shown the feature, not how they used it.

People also ask AI assistants now

Assistants such as ChatGPT are used mostly to get information and advice, and they send a small but fast-growing share of visits to websites. Local recommendations are part of that shift.

34%

34% of U.S. adults had used ChatGPT by early 2025, roughly double the share in 2023, including 58% of adults under 30.

Measured
5,123 U.S. adults, Pew American Trends Panel
Dates
Published ; data from February 24 to March 2, 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Measures whether people had ever used ChatGPT, not whether they use it to find businesses.

Nearly 80%

Practical guidance, seeking information and writing together account for nearly 80% of ChatGPT conversations.

Measured
Privacy-preserving classification of ChatGPT consumer messages
Dates
Published ; data from Through July 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
The categories are broad. The paper does not isolate searches for local businesses.

45%

45% of U.S. consumers said they used ChatGPT or another AI tool for local business recommendations, up from 6% a year earlier, making AI the third most-used source after Google and Facebook.

Measured
1,002 U.S. adults surveyed
Dates
Published . Checked at the source on .
Read with care
One self-reported survey of about 1,000 people from a local-marketing vendor. A jump this large needs replication before it is treated as settled.

83% to 71%

The share of U.S. consumers who use Google to evaluate local businesses fell from 83% in 2025 to 71% in 2026.

Measured
1,002 U.S. adults surveyed
Dates
Published . Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Self-reported. Google remains the most-used source by a wide margin.

1.1 billion

AI platforms sent more than 1.1 billion referral visits to websites in June 2025, up 357% from a year earlier.

Measured
Similarweb traffic panel, worldwide
Dates
Published ; data from June 2024 to June 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Still a small fraction of the visits search engines send. Growth is from a small base.

693%

Traffic from generative AI tools to U.S. retail websites rose 693.4% year over year in the 2025 holiday season.

Measured
Adobe Analytics: more than 1 trillion visits to U.S. retail sites, November 1 to December 31, 2025
Dates
Published ; data from November 1 to December 31, 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
U.S. retail only, and growth from a small base. It says nothing about service businesses or about AI's share of all traffic.

Being the source an answer relies on matters more than the click

If fewer people click, what an answer says about a business matters more, and so does whether the answer draws on that business's own information.

35% / 91%

Brands cited in a Google AI Overview earned 35% more organic clicks and 91% more paid clicks than brands that were not cited.

Measured
3,119 search terms across 42 organizations; 25.1 million organic and 1.1 million paid impressions
Dates
Published ; data from June 2024 to September 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Drawn from the agency's own clients, not a representative sample. Cited pages still lost click-through year over year.

1%

People clicked a link inside a Google AI summary in 1% of visits to results pages that had one.

Measured
The same Pew panel of 900 U.S. adults, March 2025
Dates
Published ; data from March 2025. Checked at the source on .
Read with care
Counts clicks on the summary's cited links only. It does not measure whether being cited changed what people thought of a business.

Up to 40%

Researchers found that changes to how a source presents its content can raise its visibility in generative engine answers by up to 40%.

Measured
GEO-bench benchmark queries run against generative engines in a lab setting
Dates
Published . Checked at the source on .
Read with care
A benchmark result, not a production guarantee. "Up to" is the best case across the methods tested.

What Lehvel measured: an early sample

In September 2026 Lehvel ran a pilot of its Business Diagnostic on four U.S. businesses: three local service businesses and one national retailer. Lehvel Observatory asked ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity about each one, once by name and once as a customer looking for that kind of business, and checked every factual claim in the answers against a record of the business's facts. Seven of Gemini's eight calls failed in that run, so the results come almost entirely from the other three.

Four businesses is a small sample. The figures describe this pilot only, and each one is published with its method.

Asked about the business by name13 of 13
Asked for the best provider of its service6 of 12
AI answers that named the business. Lehvel pilot, September 25, 2026. 4 U.S. businesses (three local service businesses and one national retailer); 25 answers, 24 of them from ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity and 1 from Gemini. An early sample, not a rate for businesses in general.

13 of 13 vs 6 of 12

When an AI assistant was asked about a business by name, it named the business in 13 of 13 answers. When it was asked for the best provider of that business's service in its area, it named the business in 6 of 12 answers, and for one business in none.

Measured
4 U.S. businesses (three local service businesses and one national retailer); 25 answers, 24 of them from ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity and 1 from Gemini
Source
Lehvel, Business Diagnostic, Phase 0 pilot observations
Dates
Published ; data from September 25, 2026. Recomputed from the stored run on .
Read with care
An early sample of four businesses and two questions each. It shows that the two kinds of question behave differently; it does not estimate a rate for businesses in general.
How Lehvel measured this
System
Lehvel Observatory, Business Truth observation run (runTruthObservation), read back from getTruthOverview
Calculation
For each business, one question naming the business and one asking for the best provider of its service in its area. An answer counts as naming the business if the business's name or a recorded alias appears. Failed calls are excluded from both numerator and denominator.
Sample
4 businesses; 25 answers returned (13 to name questions, 12 to category questions)
Date range
2026-09-25
Exclusions
Seven of Gemini's eight calls failed with a provider rate-limit error, and the run recorded 10 failed calls in all, including retries. Failed calls are excluded, so the results come almost entirely from ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity.
Privacy
No business is named and no per-business figure is published except that one business was named in none of its category answers.

69 · 2 · 64

Of 135 factual claims the answers made about these businesses, 69 matched the business's recorded facts, 2 contradicted them, and 64 could not be checked because no recorded fact covered them.

Measured
The same 4 businesses and 25 answers
Source
Lehvel, Business Diagnostic, Phase 0 pilot observations
Dates
Published ; data from September 25, 2026. Recomputed from the stored run on .
Read with care
The facts were a provisional record Lehvel assembled from each business's own site, listings and registry, not facts the owners confirmed, so the unknown share reflects how incomplete that record was as much as what the models said.
How Lehvel measured this
System
Lehvel Observatory claim extraction and truth comparison (SUPPORTED / CONFLICT / UNKNOWN)
Calculation
Each answer's factual claims are extracted and compared with the business's recorded facts. SUPPORTED: a recorded fact agrees. CONFLICT: a recorded fact disagrees. UNKNOWN: no recorded fact covers the claim. Unknown is never counted as wrong.
Sample
135 claims from 25 answers about 4 businesses
Date range
2026-09-25
Exclusions
Claims in failed calls do not exist and are not counted.
Privacy
Aggregated across the four businesses. The two conflicts are described without naming the business.

4 of 4

Comparing each business's name, address and phone across its website, its structured data, its Google Business Profile, registries and major directories produced a high or critical finding for all four businesses.

Measured
The same 4 businesses
Source
Lehvel, Business Diagnostic, Phase 0 pilot observations
Dates
Published ; data from September 25, 2026. Recomputed from the stored run on .
Read with care
Four businesses, chosen as pilots rather than at random. The finding is that the check is productive, not that most businesses have such a conflict.
How Lehvel measured this
System
Lehvel Business Diagnostic, Phase 0: deterministic crawl joined with listing, registry and directory reads, then independent verification
Calculation
A finding is recorded when two surfaces disagree about the same identity fact. Severity follows Score Model v0.1: critical when a customer following the most likely path would reach the wrong business, reach nothing, or be told something materially false about a regulated or legal fact; high for serious disagreements short of that.
Sample
4 businesses
Date range
2026-09-25
Exclusions
None. An independent verification pass reproduced the findings (verdict: pass with corrections; the corrections changed wording, not counts).
Privacy
Aggregated. No business, address or listing is identified.

3 of 4

Three of the four businesses' own websites contradicted themselves on a material fact, such as founding year, hours, ownership, or shipping and return terms.

Measured
The same 4 businesses
Source
Lehvel, Business Diagnostic, Phase 0 pilot observations
Dates
Published ; data from September 25, 2026. Recomputed from the stored run on .
Read with care
A small pilot. It shows where AI assistants can pick up a wrong fact from the business itself, not how common that is.
How Lehvel measured this
System
Lehvel Business Diagnostic, Phase 0: site-internal claim consistency check
Calculation
A contradiction is recorded when two pages of the same site state different values for the same fact.
Sample
4 businesses
Date range
2026-09-25
Exclusions
Crawler artifacts removed before counting (listed in SYNTHESIS.md §3).
Privacy
Aggregated. No business is identified.

Two of the conflicts are worth describing. One assistant gave the wrong suite number in a business’s address. Another described a studio that offers several services as bridal-only, and the phrase it drew on was the business’s own tagline. A wrong answer can start on a page the business controls. That is what Lehvel Observatory checks for, and where a Business Check starts.

What this means for a business

An assistant can only repeat what it can find, and it finds a business in more places than its website: Google, directories, reviews, registries, social profiles and other sites that mention it. When those places disagree, or leave a question unanswered, the answer a customer gets is a guess. The research above points at four things a business controls: whether its information is complete, consistent across every place it appears, current, and clear about what it does, where and for whom.

None of this needs a special AI format. Google’s guidance is that AI Overviews and AI Mode rest on the same foundations as search: pages that can be crawled and indexed, useful text, and structured data that matches what the page says. There are no additional requirements and no special schema for appearing in them. Microsoft’s guide for retailers, From discovery to influence, makes the same point from another side: keep the same values in every feed, in the page’s structured data and on the page people see, and keep the live site working, because an assistant that sends a customer to a broken page loses the sale however well it understood the business.

That is the work Lehvel does: one record of the business, published everywhere it needs to appear, checked against what search engines and AI assistants actually say, and repaired at the source when they disagree. How the record works

Today
Websites, search presence, AI visibility work, AI Agents for defined business functions, and Observatory checks of what AI assistants say, all from one business record.
Emerging
AI assistants and AI browsers that research on a customer's behalf. Lehvel observes what they say and repairs the facts they read. It does not control their answers.
Future
Software agents that take actions for customers. Lehvel is building toward businesses those agents can reliably identify, understand and contact. That is direction, not a shipped capability.

How this report was made

Outside research. We used primary sources: research institutes, platform owners, a working paper, a peer-reviewed benchmark, and vendor studies that publish their sample. A person found each figure on its source page on the date shown. Figures we could not confirm at the source were left out, including widely repeated ones. Retail-only findings are labeled as retail.

Lehvel’s own figures.Each comes from a stored run of Lehvel’s systems, with the calculation, sample, dates and exclusions shown beside it. The businesses are not named, and no figure for a single business is published.

Updates. This report is reviewed every quarter. A figure not checked at its source within 120days is marked “due for review” on the page. The next Lehvel sample will be larger, and it will be published beside this one, not in place of it.