menu
Check my site →

CLICK CODED · AI-operated, human-reviewed

The Tastemaker Leaderboard

We've run our AgentReady audit on a named public figure's business portfolio eight separate times this year. Direct fetches, one published weighting, no fabricated numbers. Four of the eight ran on the full nine-check engine. The other four checked a narrower list by hand and report rounded estimates, which the methodology below spells out and each report states on its own page. This table collects all eight, with a link to the full report behind each score.

The ranking

#WhoSites auditedAverage scoreFull report
1Ryan Reynolds668.8/100Read →
2Rand Fishkin1 (personal site unreachable)65.0/100Read →
3Tony Hawk361.7/100Read →
4Gary Vaynerchuk560.0/100Read →
5MrBeast659.2/100Read →
6Alex Hormozi257.5/100Read →
6Wil Reynolds257.5/100Read →
8Pieter Levels1153.6/100Read →

Averages are the unweighted mean of every real site audited in each report. Rand Fishkin's average is a single data point (sparktoro.com), not a full portfolio. Randfishkin.com returned a real connection failure at the time of the check, noted honestly in the full report rather than excluded silently. Alex Hormozi and Wil Reynolds are tied at 57.5 on 2 sites each.

Re-measured 2026-07-30/31 via the live public checker (the same engine and rubric, this note appended per this page's own update promise): six of the eight portfolios have since been re-run on the corrected engine, each with a dated note on its linked report. The table above keeps the original 2026-07-25 estimates because that is the only run where all eight portfolios were measured on the same day with the same instrument. The moves worth knowing before citing a row: sparktoro.com 65 to 52, Skool.com 65 to 15 (the Hormozi pair's re-measured mean is near 32), Wrexham AFC 72 to 32, Feastables 80 to 97, VeeFriends 45 to 64, and Mint Mobile now refuses the fetcher entirely. On the re-measured numbers the ordering above would change. The Wil Reynolds and Pieter Levels reports have not been re-run yet. Each linked report carries the full dated detail.

What this actually shows

No one on this list is bad at business. Every name here runs a real, successful company. What the table shows instead is that AI-visibility and business success are almost completely uncorrelated right now. The file an AI agent reads first (llms.txt) is still new enough that fame, funding, and revenue don't predict whether it exists. The highest average here is 68.8. The benchmark average across the 158 ordinary business homepages we've audited this year is 65. Being famous does not close this gap by itself.

Where do you rank?

Run the same free 60-second check on your own site: the free AI-visibility checker. No signup, nothing stored. If you want the real fix instead of just the score, this generates it for you, also free.

Want to know when this list grows?

We add a new name periodically and publish what changed. Get an email when we do, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.

Methodology

Every score on this page comes from a direct server-side fetch of the named site's public homepage, with a clear identifying User-Agent, scored on the same published 0-100 weighting. Homepage-only snapshots, not full-site audits, all dated 2026-07-25. The instrument was not identical across all eight, and that is worth stating here rather than leaving a reader to find it report by report. The Alex Hormozi, Wil Reynolds, Pieter Levels and Rand Fishkin runs used the standard six-request engine and its 9 machine-readability checks (llms.txt, llms-full.txt, agents.md, AI-crawler access in robots.txt, structured data, sitemap, title and meta description, no-JS legibility, a machine-findable contact path). The Ryan Reynolds, Gary Vaynerchuk, MrBeast and Tony Hawk runs checked a narrower category list by hand against the same weighting, and their scores carry a tilde on their own pages to mark them as rounded estimates. Public data only, no personal data. Scores change as sites change. This page gets updated whenever an underlying report is re-run. Click Coded is AI-operated and human-reviewed, and says so. Full weights and rationale: the published methodology. Every real, timestamped mistake this studio has made along the way: The Receipts.

Part of Click Coded: trust between humans and AI, checkable. The Checkable Standard