This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
Litmus
The Lighthouse for AI search visibility
The Lighthouse for AI search. Litmus scores how visible your site is to ChatGPT, Perplexity and AI Overviews. Unlike tools that just ask an LLM to grade your site (different answer every time you ask), Litmus is fully rule based and deterministic, same input, same score, always. It also tells you exactly what to fix and how to fix it. You can fix it with AI or sell the solution to clients.
A while back, one of our products started getting cited a lot in ChatGPT and Google answers.
So we tried to repeat that exact playbook on a different site. Same steps, same effort. Nothing. No citations at all.
That gap bothered me. Something other than the content itself was different between the two sites, and I had no way to tell what. I went looking for a tool that could tell me, something like Lighthouse but for AI search. Everything I found did the same trick underneath, paste your site into ChatGPT or Claude, ask it a few questions, report back whatever it said. Ask the same model the same question twice, you get two different answers.
So I went to the actual published research on AI crawling and citation behavior, cross checked it against real sites, and built a rule based scanner instead. No LLM calls in the scoring. Same input, same score, every time.
Think of content as water and this as the pipes. You fix the pipes before the water runs, or it leaks no matter how good the water is. Litmus only checks the pipes, six things: technical access, answer first content, AI comprehension, citation authority, freshness, and blog visibility. It doesn't touch your writing, that's a separate job.
Every scan gives you two exports, a fix list you can hand to a dev or paste into Claude or Cursor, and a branded proposal you can send a client. We built it first as an internal tool to audit our own client sites before doing GEO work on them, then realized it was useful on its own.
There's a whole economy right now of people, a lot of them non-developers, building sites fast with Replit or Lovable and selling them for a few hundred dollars. Most of those sites are just AI slop, they exist, but they're invisible to both search and AI. Feels like Litmus could be the thing that lets that seller run one more pass before handing it over, fix what's broken, and actually charge more for something that performs a bit better, not just something that loads.
Would love your take on a few things:
1. If you sell or build sites for clients, would a scan like this change what you charge? 2. Does the deterministic angle actually matter to you, or is "ask an AI" good enough? 3. What's the one thing you'd want it to check that it doesn't yet?
Once you sign up, drop your email in the comments or send your email to [email protected] and I'll add free credits to your account, this offer's just for Product Hunt, my way of adding some value back to this community.
About Litmus on Product Hunt
“The Lighthouse for AI search visibility”
Litmus was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 9 upvotes and 5 comments, placing #63 on the daily leaderboard. The Lighthouse for AI search. Litmus scores how visible your site is to ChatGPT, Perplexity and AI Overviews. Unlike tools that just ask an LLM to grade your site (different answer every time you ask), Litmus is fully rule based and deterministic, same input, same score, always. It also tells you exactly what to fix and how to fix it. You can fix it with AI or sell the solution to clients.
On the analytics side, Litmus competes within Analytics, SEO, Artificial Intelligence and YouTube — topics that collectively have 704k followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how Litmus performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted Litmus?
Litmus was hunted by SAI ANIRUDH. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
SAI ANIRUDH
Hi all,
A while back, one of our products started getting cited a lot in ChatGPT and Google answers.
So we tried to repeat that exact playbook on a different site. Same steps, same effort. Nothing. No citations at all.
That gap bothered me. Something other than the content itself was different between the two sites, and I had no way to tell what. I went looking for a tool that could tell me, something like Lighthouse but for AI search. Everything I found did the same trick underneath, paste your site into ChatGPT or Claude, ask it a few questions, report back whatever it said. Ask the same model the same question twice, you get two different answers.
So I went to the actual published research on AI crawling and citation behavior, cross checked it against real sites, and built a rule based scanner instead. No LLM calls in the scoring. Same input, same score, every time.
Think of content as water and this as the pipes. You fix the pipes before the water runs, or it leaks no matter how good the water is. Litmus only checks the pipes, six things: technical access, answer first content, AI comprehension, citation authority, freshness, and blog visibility. It doesn't touch your writing, that's a separate job.
Every scan gives you two exports, a fix list you can hand to a dev or paste into Claude or Cursor, and a branded proposal you can send a client. We built it first as an internal tool to audit our own client sites before doing GEO work on them, then realized it was useful on its own.
There's a whole economy right now of people, a lot of them non-developers, building sites fast with Replit or Lovable and selling them for a few hundred dollars. Most of those sites are just AI slop, they exist, but they're invisible to both search and AI. Feels like Litmus could be the thing that lets that seller run one more pass before handing it over, fix what's broken, and actually charge more for something that performs a bit better, not just something that loads.
Would love your take on a few things:
1. If you sell or build sites for clients, would a scan like this change what you charge?
2. Does the deterministic angle actually matter to you, or is "ask an AI" good enough?
3. What's the one thing you'd want it to check that it doesn't yet?
Once you sign up, drop your email in the comments or send your email to [email protected] and I'll add free credits to your account, this offer's just for Product Hunt, my way of adding some value back to this community.