Skip to main content

Diese Seite gibt es auch auf Deutsch. Auf Deutsch lesen

Brand profile

Asana

How often AI names Asana and where the brand ranks in web search. Aggregated across 3 Achtung.app industry reports.

asana.com DACH dataset (DE/AT/CH), as of 1. Aug 2026

Asana was named in 12 analysed AI answers across 3 industry reports. Its strongest placement is the SaaS & Software report: rank 29 of 324 by AI prominence. Gemini names the brand most often, on average at position 3,2 of the answer. In classic web search Asana holds one result, at an average rank of 2,0.

At a glance

AI citations
12
Summed across reports
Avg AI position
2,84
Weighted across reports
Web-search hits
1
Brave Search, aggregated
Verticals
3
AI models: 3

Verticals Asana appears in

Sorted by rank. Click to open the full vertical report.

Vertical Rank AI citations
SaaS & Software #29/324 9 View report
Media & Publishing #72/422 3 From an earlier capture
Marketing & Advertising #554/642 0 View report

AI prominence over time

How the AI prominence of Asana has moved across the collections so far. One point per report collection.

Asana in SaaS & Software

Asana 59.7 Top 10 in the report 70.3
0 25 50 75 100 Apr 26 May 26 Jun 26 Jul 26 Aug 26
Asana in SaaS & Software
Collection Asana Top 10 in the report
Apr 26 44.3 71.1
May 26 62.7 69.5
Jun 26 47.4 71.5
Jul 26 52.2 71.1
Aug 26 59.7 70.3

Asana in Media & Publishing

Asana 46.2 Top 10 in the report 67.4
0 25 50 75 100 May 26 Jun 26
Asana in Media & Publishing
Collection Asana Top 10 in the report
May 26 50.6 66.7
Jun 26 46.2 67.4

Asana in Marketing & Advertising

Asana 0.0 Top 10 in the report 60.5
0 25 50 75 100 May 26 Jun 26 Jul 26 Aug 26
Asana in Marketing & Advertising
Collection Asana Top 10 in the report
May 26 33.0 62.8
Jun 26 0.0 59.2
Jul 26 0.0 60.2
Aug 26 0.0 60.5

AI prominence is a 0 to 100 score combining citation frequency, position and model coverage. The dashed line is the average of the ten strongest brands in the same collection, which shows whether a movement came from the brand or from the whole market. The series only covers verticals with at least two collections. Definitions in the glossary.

Competitive context

The brands placed directly above and below Asana in the SaaS & Software report, by AI prominence.

Rank Brand AI prominence
#27 Typo3 61,3
#28 WordPress 60,6
#29 Asana 59,7
#30 monday AI Work Platform 59,5
#31 Salesforce 59,4

Full ranking in the report →

Which AI models name Asana?

Distribution of citations across the AI models we query. Longer bars mean the model named Asana more often in its answers.

n = 12 citations total

  • Gemini
    6 (50%)
  • Claude
    3 (25%)
  • Perplexity
    3 (25%)

Sentiment of citations

When AI answers mention Asana, in what tone do they do it?

n = 12 rated citations

  • positive: 12

Tones too infrequent to be a reliable signal are not shown.

Sample queries where Asana was named

A cross-section of the automated queries where AI models included Asana in their answer.

Query Model
welches Projektmanagement-Tool für Agenturen Claude
Software für Redaktionsplanung KMU Gemini

Discoverability for AI platforms

Weekly audit of the technical prerequisites that search-grounded AI platforms (live web search per query) need to find and render this site.

Last checked: 2. Aug 2026

AI-ready 5 of 5 critical checks passing · 3 of 4 important checks passing

Two crawler categories: AI live-retrieval crawlers fetch pages on demand to answer questions in ChatGPT, Perplexity or Claude; training crawlers feed model pre-training. Only the live-retrieval layer is graded here; the training tier is an editorial choice.

Critical: blocks AI visibility

  • AI live-retrieval crawlers allowed in robots.txt Your robots.txt must allow OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, PerplexityBot, Perplexity-User, Claude-User, and Claude-SearchBot. These fetch pages on demand to answer questions in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude. Blocking any of them takes the brand's own pages out of the source pool for those answers; the brand can still be described from third-party pages.
  • No silent edge block on AI live-retrieval crawlers Even with robots.txt allowing them, the edge (Cloudflare, WAF, server) can still 403/429/503 AI bot user-agents. Most common culprit: Cloudflare's "Block AI Scrapers and Crawlers" managed rule, or Bot Fight Mode. Allow these UAs at a level above the WAF challenge rules.
  • HTTPS reachable on the homepage The homepage must be reachable over HTTPS without a redirect chain that fails. A TLS error is the one failure no crawler can work around, and retry behaviour is not documented for any of them.
  • Sitemap reachable A reachable sitemap helps AI crawlers discover internal pages beyond the homepage. We try /sitemap.xml, /sitemap_index.xml (Yoast), /wp-sitemap.xml (WordPress 5.5+), and any Sitemap: URL in robots.txt.
  • Homepage renders content without JavaScript Crawlers differ in whether they render JavaScript: OpenAI documents its fetchers as reading raw HTML, while Google-grounded answers ride a search index that does render. If the homepage is a SPA shell, the non-rendering crawlers see an empty div and have nothing to cite. Server-side rendering or pre-rendering makes the page readable to all of them; the check looks for at least 100 words and 1 heading without JS.

Important: improves capture

  • Canonical URL declared A canonical link tag tells crawlers which URL is the definitive version. Avoids citation fragmentation across www / non-www / trailing-slash variants.
  • Open Graph title and image set Open Graph title and image are what link-preview cards are built from across the web. Which AI surfaces use them, and where, is not documented per assistant; the cost of setting them is low enough that the check grades it anyway.
  • HSTS header advertised The Strict-Transport-Security header tells browsers to enforce HTTPS for future visits. Set in your web server config or via Plesk's HTTPS Strict Transport Security toggle.
  • No SPA, or a SPA with a meaningful noscript fallback When the homepage is a SPA, a noscript block with real fallback content (not just "please enable JavaScript") gives AI crawlers at least something to read. Best is server-side rendering; this is the half-measure.

Agent readiness: makes facts machine-readable

This check does not count towards AI visibility. It answers a different question: could software verify a fact about this brand without reading prose? On current evidence, structured markup does not make a brand cited more often in AI answers.

  • Organization or WebSite JSON-LD on the homepage Organization or WebSite JSON-LD on the homepage helps search engines recognize the brand as an entity (Knowledge Graph, rich results). Current evidence shows no direct effect on grounded-LLM citations; those models read the visible page text, not the JSON-LD. Still useful SERP hygiene; add via schema.org markup in the head.

Training-crawler status (informational, not graded): 0 / 5 blockiert.

Diagnostics

JSON-LD types
Organization, WebSite, BreadcrumbList

SEO hygiene; per Google not a direct lever for AI citations.

Sitemap
16.024 URLs
llms.txt (informational)
present

Per Google, no effect on AI visibility; tracked here for information only.

Encryption
HTTPS ✓ · HSTS ✓
SPA
Detected client framework: next

Track your own brand over time?

Achtung.app monitors how often a brand is named in AI answers and classic web search, which verticals it appears in, and how that changes over time.

Check your brand

All figures come from Achtung.app's published vertical reports. Achtung.app runs standardized, brand-free queries against AI models and classic web search, extracts named brands, and consolidates them on their canonical domain. Details in the methodology document.