One question comes up in almost every SEO conversation this year: now that AI answers summarize everything, are backlinks still worth paying for?
A new study published in October 2026 gives the clearest data-backed answer we have seen so far. Researchers asked Google AI Mode and ChatGPT 60 everyday questions, collected the pages Google ranked in its top 20, and checked which pages the AI engines actually cited. Then they ranked nine signals by how much each one raised a page’s chance of being cited.
The result: the old fundamentals won, and the trendy “AEO hacks” lost.
What the study tested
The test was fair by design. Every page compared had already earned a Google top 10 ranking, so the question was purely: among strong pages, what gets cited?
Nine signals were measured: five SEO fundamentals (links, ranking position, crawlability, freshness, structured data) and four popular AEO tactics (llms.txt files, FAQ schema, TL;DR boxes, question-style headings).
The results, from strongest to weakest
1. Backlinks to the page itself. Pages with 10 or more linking websites were cited by AI Mode 18.5% of the time, against 4.3% for pages with fewer. The ChatGPT split was absolute: all 12 top-10 pages it cited had 10+ linking websites, and not one of the 254 pages with fewer links was cited.
2. A top-3 Google ranking. Pages ranked 1 to 3 were cited 13.7% of the time, against 5.2% for positions 4 to 10. Ranking still matters, with one caveat: most AI citations did not come from Google’s top 20 at all. Both engines run their own searches, so a strong ranking raises the odds but is not the only door in.
3. Content a crawler can read without JavaScript. When a page’s content lived in the HTML itself, AI Mode cited it 8.2% of the time. Of the 17 pages whose text only appeared after JavaScript ran, not one was cited by either engine.
4. A visible “updated” date. Pages that told readers when they were last updated were cited 13.9% of the time, against 6.1% for pages without one. Freshness is an old ranking idea, not an AI one, and a date only helps if the page behind it is genuinely kept current.
5. Structured data of any kind. Pages with any JSON-LD markup were cited almost twice as often by AI Mode. This was the weakest fundamental, and ChatGPT did not follow the pattern.
What did not work
The four popular AEO hacks sat at the bottom of the ranking, all statistically flat:
- llms.txt files: 6.8% cited with, 8% without. No effect.
- FAQPage schema: 6.8% cited with, 8% without. No effect.
- TL;DR or key-takeaways boxes: 7.4% with, 7.8% without. No effect.
- Question-style headings: 8.3% with, 7.7% without. No effect.
None of these hurt. They simply did nothing the data could detect.
What this means for your business
If anyone tells you link building is dead in the AI era, this study is the counter evidence. AI citations appear to run on the same trust signals as classic rankings: real websites vouching for your page with links, content that crawlers can actually read, pages that rank near the top, and content that is visibly maintained.
Three practical moves follow directly:
- Keep earning real backlinks from real websites. This remains the single biggest lever, in classic search and in AI answers. A steady guest posting and outreach program is still the most reliable way to earn them.
- Keep your content crawlable and your dates visible. No JavaScript-only content, and show a real last-updated date on every important page. If you are unsure what crawlers see on your site, a technical SEO review will show you exactly.
- Measure citations, not just rankings. AI visibility is now a metric of its own. Ask your SEO provider how your brand appears in AI-generated answers, not only where you rank.
An honest note on the study
This was a small study: 60 questions, 335 pages that could be read, 26 AI Mode citations and 12 ChatGPT citations. Small samples can wobble. It was also produced under a paid promotional program (Semrush’s Creator Accelerator), though the author states the measurements are his own and Semrush did not supply or review the data. An independent study by Sistrix across 96,418 URLs reached a compatible verdict on the big levers, with llms.txt again showing no measurable effect. Treat this as strong directional evidence, not a final law.
Want to know how visible your brand is in AI answers? Message us on WhatsApp for a quick chat, or claim a free SEO audit through our contact page and ask about AI visibility. We will review your rankings, your backlink profile, and how AI engines treat your pages, then give you a clear plan.