{
  "kind": "tracker",
  "studySlug": "llmstxt-effect",
  "slug": "llmstxt-adoption-by-tier-tracker",
  "title": "llms.txt adoption by citation tier",
  "description": "Adoption rate across different levels of citation prominence.",
  "lastUpdated": "2026-09-04",
  "lastTested": "2026-03-14",
  "sourceStudyUrl": "/trakkr-research/llmstxt-effect",
  "sourceStudyTitle": "The llms.txt Effect",
  "claimIds": [
    "llmstxt-effect:adoption",
    "llmstxt-effect:top5k-adoption",
    "llmstxt-effect:top50-adoption"
  ],
  "relatedSlugs": [
    "answer:does-llms-txt-increase-ai-citations",
    "answer:how-common-is-llms-txt-on-ai-cited-domains",
    "fact:llms-txt-adoption-is-only-thirteen-point-three-percent"
  ],
  "methodologySummary": "Built from HTTP scans of 37,894 AI-cited domains, linked to 337,362 citations and 882 citation snapshots in the Trakkr corpus.",
  "limitations": [
    "This is an observational study. It measures correlation with citation outcomes, not a controlled experiment.",
    "Adoption is uneven by sector, so raw averages can hide category concentration in SaaS and developer tooling.",
    "The top-5,000 test returns p=0.85. The full scanned sample returns p<0.001 with reported r=-0.065. Neither establishes a causal effect. The public aggregates do not include confidence intervals or document the cohort for citation means and medians well enough to recompute the tests."
  ],
  "keywords": [
    "llms.txt",
    "llms txt effect",
    "AI citations",
    "does llms.txt work"
  ],
  "schemaHints": {
    "pageType": "WebPage",
    "includeDataset": true,
    "includeItemList": true,
    "itemListName": "llms.txt adoption by citation tier"
  },
  "summary": "Adoption rises modestly into the mid-ranked tiers, but the most-cited head domains do not show strong dependence on llms.txt.",
  "keyFacts": [
    {
      "label": "Adoption rate",
      "value": "13.3%",
      "detail": "Domains with llms.txt in the study.",
      "claimId": "llmstxt-effect:adoption"
    },
    {
      "label": "Top 5k adoption",
      "value": "16.1%",
      "detail": "Adoption among the top 5,000 cited domains.",
      "claimId": "llmstxt-effect:top5k-adoption"
    },
    {
      "label": "Top 50 adoption",
      "value": "6.0%",
      "detail": "Adoption among the top 50 cited domains.",
      "claimId": "llmstxt-effect:top50-adoption"
    }
  ],
  "benchmarkRows": [
    {
      "label": "Adoption rate",
      "value": "13.3%",
      "note": "Domains with llms.txt in the study."
    },
    {
      "label": "Top 5k adoption",
      "value": "16.1%",
      "note": "Adoption among the top 5,000 cited domains."
    },
    {
      "label": "Top 50 adoption",
      "value": "6.0%",
      "note": "Adoption among the top 50 cited domains."
    }
  ],
  "rankedItems": [
    {
      "name": "Top 5,000 cited domains",
      "value": "16.1%",
      "detail": "The highest adoption tier highlighted in the study."
    },
    {
      "name": "Full corpus",
      "value": "13.3%",
      "detail": "Baseline adoption across all scanned domains."
    },
    {
      "name": "Top 50 cited domains",
      "value": "6.0%",
      "detail": "The very head of the citation graph is not highly reliant on llms.txt."
    }
  ],
  "changes": [
    {
      "title": "Adoption is uneven by tier",
      "detail": "Mid-ranked domains adopt more readily than the absolute citation head."
    },
    {
      "title": "Top performers are not proving the thesis",
      "detail": "The strongest cited domains do not look like a showcase for llms.txt dependence."
    }
  ]
}