AI Visibility Report: Trojan Monkeys

Week of May 25, 2026

TL;DR

Trojan Monkeys appears in 13% of AI-search responses about Amsterdam creative and AI-native agencies, tied with Media.Monks. The gap isn't volume; it's which queries surface the brand. Trojan Monkeys appears when it's already named in the prompt, but doesn't surface on category-level questions ("best AI agency Amsterdam") where Dutch trade press is the deciding factor.

The citation picture

Across 23 Dutch market queries run through Gemini with Google Search grounding:

Even share with the category's most-recognized player. The opportunity sits in expanding where Trojan Monkeys shows up, not increasing absolute frequency.

How different AIs see Trojan Monkeys

Gemini (13%) and Claude (13%) cited Trojan Monkeys on the same 3 prompts, zero divergence between the two LLMs.

This is unusual. Most brands show meaningful split between Gemini's live-search-driven view and Claude's training-corpus-driven view. The implication: Trojan Monkeys has a single, narrow zone of recognition in the AI ecosystem, and both models reflect it identically. Expanding the footprint requires expanding the underlying web signals, algorithm shifts alone won't move it.

Where Trojan Monkeys shows up vs. doesn't

Shows up:

• Prompts that name Trojan Monkeys directly in a comparison (e.g. "Trojan Monkeys vs Media.Monks", "Random Studio vs Trojan Monkeys")
• The trojanmonkeys.nl domain is itself cited 6× as a source, middle of the pack

Doesn't (and a competitor does):

The pattern: Trojan Monkeys is a known entity to AI search, but isn't yet the default answer for category-level questions about AI-native agencies. Those queries get routed to Media.Monks because the trade press uses Media.Monks as the definitional reference.

What AI search treats as authoritative

LLMs draw on two distinct types of source when answering Amsterdam agency questions. Both matter, and the split is the key insight.

Dutch trade press, the third-party trust layer:

Competitor-owned domains, used as definitional references:

Notable separately: Aigency Amsterdam is cited 8×, a separate company unrelated to Trojan Monkeys, surfacing on Amsterdam-AI-agency queries.

The pattern: AI search trusts both trade-press features and the agency's own corporate site as a category reference. Media.Monks wins on both axes. Trojan Monkeys is in the trade-press list (just barely) and has half the own-domain citation weight of Media.Monks. Closing the gap means both more trade-press placements and more crawlable category-defining content on trojanmonkeys.nl itself.

One action this week

Publish a structured llms.txt file at trojanmonkeys.nl/llms.txt, the emerging standard that LLM crawlers (Anthropic's, Google's, OpenAI's) actively read to understand what a site is about. The file should explicitly position Trojan Monkeys as an "AI-native content agency in Amsterdam," reference the active client roster (SPAR, Flower Farm, Flink), and link to the highest-priority pages on the site for crawlers to index.

In parallel, build a category-anchor page on trojanmonkeys.nl using the exact semantic phrases LLMs use to disambiguate categories: "AI-native content agency Amsterdam," "AI production flow," "alternative to traditional creative agencies." The page becomes the on-site reference LLMs cite, the same way media.monks.com currently is. These two changes, llms.txt + category page, ship inside a week and close the own-domain citation gap without waiting on trade-press cycles.

Trade-press placements (Marketing Report, Emerce, Adformatie) become the second layer once the on-site GEO foundation is in place.