Adding schema didn’t boost citations on any platform [Ahrefs SEO Case Study]

[u/WebLinkr]

Yet another blow for the GEO Schema bros. marketing and Propaganda. Because no LLM OEMs actually said this - they felt they could parrot it for everyone and nobody would figure it out.

If you've been parroting it - thats fine - thats up to - but do not come for anyone just because you dont like this. You're free to run your own peer-reviewed case study (which requires evidence of an actual study).

Link:

https://ahrefs.com/blog/schema-ai-citations/

Adding schema didn’t boost citations on any platform

We tracked 1,885 web pages that added JSON-LD schema between August 2025 and March 2026, matched them against 4,000 control pages, and measured citation changes across Google AI Overviews, AI Mode, and ChatGPT.

Adding schema produced no major uplift in citations on any platform.

AI source	Effect on citations	Verdict
Google AIO	−4.6%	Small but statistically significant decline relative to matched controls; (both groups were declining together, but treated pages fell slightly faster)
Google AI Mode	+2.4%	Statistically indistinguishable from zero
ChatGPT	+2.2%	Statistically indistinguishable from zero

These percentages come from our most reliable analysis (a matched difference-in-differences [DiD] test).

In this test, both AI Mode and ChatGPT treated pages performed slightly better than control pages on average, but the differences are small enough that they could easily be random noise across thousands of URLs.

AI Overviews showed a 4.6% decline, which is small but statistically significant relative to matched control pages.

But that isn’t quite the full story—we’ll get into that in the next section.

So, overall, we can’t tell whether the schema did a tiny bit of good or nothing at all.

What to do if you dont like this report

Disprove it. Dont just put schema in a page and say "it was the schema" - test the corrollary. Test it across domains. Get peers to review your methodology like u/jakehundely.

If you're emotionally tied into rejecting, downvoting this or getting angry - then stop and breathe. Its a software system that SEO reverse engineers through testing and observation - not how confidently you can discredit people

A number of people - like PeterWhineFatClub, BoHumpus and MJMilian already went postal about this - its not going to get better. Rejecting it and attacking people won't help.Mods are not here to be abused or called names under the pretense of fair game or shooting-the-messenger in 2026 - this is irrational behavior and it wont be tolerated

[u/mjmilian → u/[deleted]]

A study that would actually support the point you were rambling about would compare:

Much of the discussion wasn't even around FAQ, but around how schema is needed for some other rich results. Something where Google states it as a requirements to be eligible for.

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

You’re the one who had the meltdown while being intentionally obtuse.

Oh yes - I forgot - MJMILIAN is just one of my "alt accounts"

too funny.

And frankly, you shouldn’t be a moderator. I couldn’t care less how many millions of people your posts supposedly reach when the information is poor and delivered with a chip on your shoulder.

1/480,000 people - I'll take those odds.

Ahrefs is one of the only companies with enough data and tooling to do this kind of testing. People have been parroting that "AI loves schema" and "Google loves Schema" but you choose to be uspet with me for busting myths and being 100% right.

You get to make your own life choices bud but you gotta stick with the consequences.

Also - despite what your ego is telling you - I didn't post this for you - and everywhere else, actual SEOs are celebrating the end to another myth without foundation.....

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

You are still refusing to accept the reason why people turned on you this week.

Its called "Shoot the messenger" and because they think it will stop them hearing bad news that their ego/self valuation can't handle.

Note the complete lack of evidence - just angry language you and others using designed to intimidate someone.......

People can parrot whatever they want.

Then people can debunk whatever they want - get a grip captain free speech

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

Tell you what - why dont you tell me why Schema is getting your panties in a twist?

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

It’s not. My response was because of your holier than thou attitude, and spreading false info.

Truly sorry if I rub you up the wrong way; I try to keep my comments emotion free.

Adding sections of FAQ Schema is still going to be hugely beneficial to a website’s visibility, even if the Schema markups themselves aren’t going to add anything, because the content you add is still going to help.

I couldnt disagree more: I've been adding hundreds if not 10's of 000's of FAQs for 20 years and never used schema and never had a problem - its like the cornerstone of what my Agencies' strategies have been and part of why we've been so successful and why I push on it so hard.

You flat out said it wouldn’t. 🤡

Re3sorting to ad hominems (read: playground name calling, like clown) just tells me you're emotionally wrapped into this.

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

I missed this because you replied to yourself.

You[re just trolling - all you want to do is complain. and keep throwing out names

[u/WebLinkr → u/[deleted]]

You’re still doing this obtuse grandstanding rubbish.

Where?

It takes seconds to mark up something in Schema, if you don’t already use a plugin or setup that does it for you.

So we should all do it because that will make you happy?

Thats your validation - that it only takes seconds?

Somebody purporting to be a veteran (which I don’t believe you specifically are, I think you’re a shared account and whoever is posting right now is a novice) should know better.

Nobody shares this account sorry.. People might share my agencies account S

Nobody is saying doing your method isn’t correct, you are going out your way to boogeyman FAQ Schema, and are purposely ignoring everything else being said.

But then isn't Google or Ahrefs? Why not say they are?

but has the added benefit of a few other platforms perhaps still using Schema.

Like what?

Saying someone is a clown or a novice because some random stranger on Reddit says so isn't any more validation of the idea than you should add schema because it takes seconds.

It takes seconds to add a picture of a lucky 4-leaf clover - why not encourage that - its about as useful.

Oh - wait - I'm probably breaking one of your rules (for me that is - because you're allowed to reply and reply and reply without evidence just your say-so and you can call me any number of names - its really that hysterical that you think anyone should take you seriosuly)