Growth
2026-10-16 · 10 min read
Sapun Lamichhane
Founder & CEO of Arcetis
Generative engine optimization, often shortened to GEO and closely related to a term called answer engine optimization or AEO, is the practice of structuring and positioning content so that it is more likely to be picked up, summarized, and cited by generative AI systems - ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Google's own AI Overviews that now sit above standard search results. The goal shifts from "rank on page one" to "get mentioned or quoted inside the answer the AI gives, ideally with a link back."
It is a genuinely different discipline from traditional SEO, not a rebrand of it. A page can rank well in classic Google search and still never get pulled into an AI-generated summary, because these systems decide what to cite based on a different, less transparent set of signals than the ranking algorithm most SEO work has been built around for two decades.
It is worth being precise about the terminology too: some use "AEO" (answer engine optimization) and "GEO" (generative engine optimization) interchangeably, while others draw a finer distinction between optimizing for direct voice or answer-box results versus optimizing for longer, generated AI responses. In practice, for a business trying to act on this, the underlying work overlaps heavily enough that the exact label matters less than understanding the shift itself.
“Ranking number one on Google used to be the finish line - now it is possible to rank number one and still be invisible if the AI answer above it never mentions you at all.”
Based on what is observable from the outside, a few patterns hold up reasonably consistently: AI systems favor content that gives a clear, direct, well-structured answer to a specific question rather than a long narrative lead-up before the point; they favor sources that are mentioned and linked across multiple places on the web, not just a business's own site, since that pattern looks like independent corroboration rather than self-promotion; and they favor content with clear structure - headings, lists, and direct statements - that is easy to extract a clean answer from.
Structured data markup (schema) that explicitly tells a search engine what a page is about - an FAQ, a product, a local business - also appears to help these systems parse and trust content faster, though it is not a guarantee of citation on its own.
Freshness also appears to play a role, though the extent varies by topic - for anything time-sensitive, such as current pricing or availability, AI systems seem more likely to favor sources that show visible evidence of being kept up to date rather than a page that has clearly not been touched in years, which gives an ongoing reason to revisit and update existing content rather than publishing it once and leaving it alone.
Practical steps that are reasonably within a business's control: write content as direct answers to specific real questions customers actually ask, rather than generic industry fluff; get genuinely mentioned on other relevant websites, directories, and press rather than relying only on owned channels, since being cited elsewhere seems to strengthen how AI systems weigh a source; keep basic facts (pricing ranges, service areas, hours) consistent and clearly stated across the website, Google Business Profile, and any other listings, since inconsistency undermines confidence in any single source; and use structured data markup where it is relevant to the business.
None of this is exotic - much of it overlaps heavily with simply being a well-documented, well-referenced, trustworthy business online, which was always good practice and is now additionally rewarded by a new set of systems.
Reviews and third-party mentions carry weight here in a way that is easy to underestimate - a business that is discussed, reviewed, or referenced on other websites, directories, and social platforms appears to register more strongly to these systems than a business whose only online presence is its own website, however well that website is built.
No agency, including Arcetis, can honestly guarantee that a specific AI tool will cite a specific business on a specific query. These systems are controlled entirely by companies outside Nepal, their selection logic is not fully public, and it changes without notice. Anyone promising guaranteed AI citations is making a claim they cannot actually back - the same honest caveat that has always applied to traditional search rankings, just now extended to a newer channel. A business should treat any vendor promising otherwise with real skepticism.
What is realistic is improving the probability over time by doing the underlying work well and consistently, in the same way good SEO practice has never guaranteed a number-one ranking but reliably improves the odds for a business that keeps at it.
It is also fair to say that measurement of GEO performance is still immature compared to traditional SEO, where tools have tracked keyword rankings for two decades. Tracking whether and how often a business gets mentioned inside AI answers is a newer and less standardized practice, and any tool or agency claiming precise, reliable tracking of this today should be evaluated with some skepticism about how exactly that measurement is being done.
Because GEO is new and most businesses - in Nepal and elsewhere - have not started thinking about it deliberately, there is currently more relative advantage available to a business that does the basics well now than there will be once it becomes standard practice, the same pattern that played out with SEO itself fifteen to twenty years ago.
Arcetis describes itself as among Nepal's first agencies to treat AEO/GEO as a distinct practice area, working on it since before it had a common name, under founder Sapun Lamichhane. That early focus does not translate into guarantees - it translates into having already made the mistakes and learned the patterns that a business starting from zero on this topic has not yet encountered. That kind of accumulated, hands-on familiarity is difficult to shortcut, however good a newcomer's theoretical understanding of the space might be.
For a Nepali business weighing whether this is worth any attention yet, the reasonable answer is: worth the basic hygiene work now, without over-investing in a channel that is still actively evolving and where the underlying platforms could change their behavior at any time without warning.
No, though they overlap. SEO is about ranking in traditional search results; GEO is specifically about being cited or mentioned inside AI-generated answers, which uses a different and less transparent set of selection signals.
No honest agency can guarantee this. The systems are controlled by companies outside Nepal and their citation logic is not fully public or stable. What is realistic is improving the underlying signals - clear content, external mentions, consistent facts - that appear to correlate with being cited more often.
No. Traditional SEO fundamentals like site structure, page speed, and local listings remain necessary and valuable on their own. GEO is additive work on top of that foundation, not a replacement for it.