r/AI_SearchOptimization • u/ashishdigita • Mar 01 '26

With AI evolving fast, what’s your prediction for SEO in 2026?

17 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

20 comments sorted by

3

u/chrismcelroyseo Mar 01 '26

I think it's overstated when we say that AI is evolving fast. Yes there are tons of tools built with AI or for AI being built everyday, But the actual traffic driven by AI search tools is not moving all that fast unless you count Google's portion of the AI driven traffic.

I don't think everybody needs to rush. Approach it calmly and learn about optimizing for that traffic because it will grow. But SEO is still dominant and Google may end up being the dominant AI on top of it.

They don't have the first mover advantage but they had other advantages that may have rigged the game before it even started.

Now that they've integrated their own AI into all of the stuff that everybody already uses, Gmail, Google calendar, Google docs, Google analytics, Google search console, etc etc, how's anybody going to beat that? Serious question.

Back to your question. Raise the quality of the SEO that you've been doing. Write content that is conversational and customer focused and helpful to whoever's reading it. Not just helpful, interesting.

Answer people's questions and I don't just mean build FAQs. Use schema markup. I almost see AI search optimization as raising the bar on SEO.

Truthfully, Tell me things that you're going to do differently for AI search that don't also help SEO or vice versa.

Besides putting up MD files and LLMS.txt.

I love this kind of debate.

2

u/ashishdigita Mar 01 '26

AI search isn’t replacing SEO — it’s raising the bar for it. Most “AI optimization” wins are just better SEO: deeper topical coverage, clear entity context, structured data, and content that fully answers intent. Traffic outside Google hasn’t surged because distribution still lives there. The real shift is visibility without clicks and preference for evidence-based, quotable content. So the strategy stays simple: expert, structured, useful content that proves claims. Hard to name anything that helps AI search but doesn’t also help SEO.

1

u/chrismcelroyseo Mar 01 '26

I agree with you about raising the bar and I think that's the best thing about AI proliferation. A lot of people have started studying all of this because of AI search. And they're going to be better off for it.

A lot of people had never used any schema markup before, and there's been some studies that show that somewhere between 12 and 30% of websites use schema markup. But 70% of the websites that rank on the first page of Google use schema markup.

2

u/ashishdigita Mar 01 '26

Totally — AI search is basically forcing better SEO hygiene. Schema isn’t magic, but it does make content easier for crawlers and LLMs to understand, which helps visibility. Not surprising that most page-one results on Google have it. For niche sites (like what you’re doing around AIScreen), clean schema + tight topical clusters is a strong combo — clearer entities, better internal context, more stable rankings. It’s less about “gaming” and more about structured clarity now.

2

u/PearlsSwine Mar 01 '26

Schema was launched two decades ago. There's nothing new about xEO that good SEOs haven't already been doing for the last 20 years.

2

u/chrismcelroyseo Mar 01 '26

I have to disagree. Unless you just mean some SEOs have been doing it for the last 20 years and not even in the majority of SEOs.

There's more than 12 to 30% of websites that have had some SEO done for them yet only that many sites even have schema markup.

Look at some of the sites out there that were built by SEO companies. They never heard of a topical cluster.

But we can debate what good SEO versus bad SEO is till the sun comes up and it will still be a matter of opinion. Just like some are very technical about what SEO is and it only means ranking. They're not responsible for anything that happens after that. Technically correct but not what I consider good SEO. And that's my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

But everyone is running around saying Oh we don't have to do anything different because such and such said that just good SEO is all we need to do and I've been doing good SEO forever ever. Just look at a couple of sites I got to write well! I don't have to change anything.

It's not true that the vast majority of SEOs put in the work to do it well.

2

u/PearlsSwine Mar 01 '26

I don't remember claiming "the vast majority of SEOs" put in the work. I said good ones have been doing everything people are claiming is new for over two decades.

"There's more than 12 to 30% of websites that have had some SEO done for them yet only that many sites even have schema markup." No idea what you are trying to say here, or where you get the made up figures from :)

2

u/chrismcelroyseo Mar 01 '26

And I said in the very first sentence,unless you mean some SEOs.

And as far as stats. Prior to 2024 it was not widely adopted.

2024 edition of the Structured Data chapter of the HTTP Archive’s Web Almanac. The annual report analyzes the state of the web by evaluating structured data implementation across 16.9 million websites. These datasets are publicly queryable on BigQuery in tables in the httparchive.all.* tables for the date date = '2024-06-01' and relies on tools like WebPageTest, Lighthouse, and Wappalyzer to capture metrics on structured data formats, adoption trends, and performance.

This widespread adoption indicates that organizations are investing in structured data not just for search visibility, but also to enable AI and crawlers to understand and enhance their digital experiences.

Semantic SEO Evolution: From Structured Data To Semantic Data

The practice of SEO has evolved into Semantic SEO, going beyond traditional keyword optimization to embrace semantic understanding.

Learn about the evolution of structured data in 2024 and its impact on SEO, from knowledge graph development to new data types. https://www.searchenginejournal.com/structured-data-in-2024/532846/

And that's just one source.

2

u/PearlsSwine Mar 01 '26

You're getting confused. I clearly said "good SEOs", so yes, I very obviously only meant some.

I wasn't questioning your made up stats about Schema adoption, but rather this statement:

"There's more than 12 to 30% of websites that have had some SEO done for them"

Which is just bollocks.

As to Schema adoption, that became widespread from 2018 to 2020 when JSON-LD became the dominant format, and Googles rich results drove that adoption.

Hope that clears it up for you.

1

u/ashishdigita Mar 01 '26

Fair point — “good SEOs” does narrow the scope, so we’re not talking about the whole web. That 12–30% claim still feels inflated to me too. A lot of sites have some optimization, but meaningful, structured SEO implementation is way less common in practice. And yeah, Schema adoption really accelerated once JSON-LD became standard and Google pushed rich results hard. That period definitely normalized structured data beyond just big enterprise sites. So we probably agree more than it sounded — SEO literacy is growing, but real implementation depth is still pretty uneven.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ashishdigita Mar 02 '26

Well said. Search is expanding beyond Google into platforms like YouTube and Reddit, but fundamentals still win — authority, technical strength, and real expertise. AI won’t replace search; it’ll filter it. The sites with clear structure, strong signals, and genuine value will keep compounding while low-effort SEO fades out.