IMPACT™ is the search intelligence platform that powers our Google-era reputation work. It tracks every URL ranking on Google for defined keyword sets across 500 cities, 69 countries, and 23 languages, classifying each result by ownership (client-owned, earned media, third-party, hostile), SERP feature (organic, image, video, news, AI Overview, People Also Ask), and competitive position. The platform processes more than 100 million data points daily and stores the full time series, which means a ranking shift or a new SERP feature is visible within hours rather than after a quarterly audit. Account teams use IMPACT to spot threats early, benchmark against peer companies, prove monthly progress to clients, and prioritize where to act first.

AIQ™ is the AI-era counterpart to IMPACT. It polls eight AI engines daily - ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Claude, Grok, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode - using a defined set of prompts for each tracked brand or person, then captures the full response, the sources each engine cited, the sentiment, and the narrative themes. Over time, the platform shows how the AI picture is shifting, which sources are gaining or losing weight, and how a brand compares to its peers across each engine. AIQ launched publicly on March 31, 2026 and is available both as a self-serve SaaS from $99 per month and as the analytical engine inside our AI reputation management advisory programs.

AIQ launched publicly on March 31, 2026. The platform had been in active use inside Five Blocks for the prior year, supporting client engagements while we refined the model coverage, source attribution, and reporting layer. The public launch added the self-serve SaaS tier and the agency configuration; the enterprise capabilities had already been live with clients before that date.

The self-serve tier starts at $99 per month and is appropriate for an in-house team running a small number of topics. Agency plans, which support multi-client management and white-label reporting, are priced based on the number of client brands. Enterprise engagements that bundle AIQ with our advisory services are scoped individually. Pricing details and a trial are at aiq.fiveblocks.com.

AIQ is built for the comms function. The primary users are chief communications officers, corporate affairs leaders, PR firm account leads, brand managers, and the analysts who support them. The question AIQ answers is the one those teams now have to answer every day: what is ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, and the rest saying about our brand or our client, where is it coming from, and how is it moving. It is the same diagnostic discipline applied to AI that comms teams already apply to media coverage and search rankings, just with a tool built specifically for the AI engines.

They are designed to work together but they are separate products. AIQ™ is a SaaS platform - it monitors AI engine responses, identifies sources, and tracks narrative change. Five Blocks' AI Reputation Management is the advisory service in which our analysts interpret AIQ data and our account team executes against it: improving the source layer, working at the Wikipedia and Knowledge Graph entity layer, coordinating with the client's PR firm on placements that AI engines actually weight. Many clients start with AIQ alone, see what the data shows, and then bring us in for the source-layer work that the data points to. Others engage the full service from day one with AIQ embedded inside it.

WikiAlerts™ is a free Wikipedia monitoring tool we built and made publicly available at wikialerts.fiveblocks.com. Users add the Wikipedia pages they want to watch - their company page, executive biographies, brand pages, competitor pages - and receive email notification the moment any of those pages is edited, with a diff view showing exactly what changed. A one-click revert option is available for clear vandalism. The tool was built because conventional monitoring services either miss Wikipedia edits entirely or flag them so slowly that the damage is already cached, copied, and quoted by AI engines by the time a comms team finds out.

Anyone whose Wikipedia article (or that of an executive, brand, product, or competitor) matters enough to know about edits in real time. Most active subscribers are corporate communications teams, PR firms monitoring client pages, in-house counsel watching for legal-sensitive language, executive offices watching personal biographies, and investor relations teams tracking competitor pages. WikiAlerts is free, so the practical threshold is interest, not budget.

WikiAlerts™ is free, standalone, and open to anyone. Users sign up at wikialerts.fiveblocks.com, add the Wikipedia articles they want to monitor, and receive notifications when those articles are edited. No Five Blocks engagement is required. Many users have never been Five Blocks clients and never will be. The tool exists because real-time monitoring of Wikipedia is foundational to any modern reputation program, and making the monitoring layer free lowers the barrier for the rest of the industry. Where users do become clients, WikiAlerts integrates with the rest of the program; where they do not, the tool continues to do its job for free.

GeoSearch lets us run a Google query from any of hundreds of specific cities and countries worldwide and see exactly what a searcher in that location would see. No VPN, no proxy, no manual configuration. The use cases are constant in our work: a CCO in New York needs to know what the company's executive page looks like to a Frankfurt journalist; an IR team needs to see whether a contested headline is dominating the SERP in Singapore the way it is in London; a Wikipedia article change needs to be checked against geo-specific results. GeoSearch produces that view in seconds.

GeoSearch is bundled into our service work today and is the engine behind the geographic search analysis in IMPACT and in our client reporting. Standalone access has been licensed in select cases for agencies and in-house teams that need geo-specific Google views without an advisory engagement. Inquiries go through the standard contact path on fiveblocks.com.

IMPACTNews is the news-search counterpart to IMPACT. It tracks the Google News tab specifically - which outlets are ranking for a given keyword, how the news SERP is composed (top stories, smaller boxes, video carousels), and how news coverage moves over time. The need is straightforward: the news tab now has its own algorithm and its own competitive logic, and a reputation program that tracks only the main Google results misses an entire vector. Public release is scheduled for later in 2026.

A topic is the unit of analysis inside AIQ. When a user sets up a topic, they define the subject (a brand, executive, product, or theme), a set of prompts that AI engines will be asked about that subject, a peer set for comparison, and any tags they want to attach for filtering. The same prompts and peers run against all eight AI engines daily, so the resulting data is directly comparable across models. Most clients run between three and ten topics per brand, with separate topics for the corporate brand, key executives, key products, and any active issue.

Self-serve starts at $99 per month and is suitable for an in-house comms team tracking its own brand and competitors. The agency tier adds multi-client management, white-label reporting, and seat scaling for PR firms managing several client brands. The enterprise tier is custom-scoped and is typically combined with our advisory services so the platform output flows directly into a Five Blocks engagement. Full plan details and a trial are at aiq.fiveblocks.com.

Yes - the data is yours. Every view inside AIQ can be exported as a screenshot, every dataset as CSV or JSON, and we are adding MCP server support that will let leading AI models query the platform directly. The export options matter because most users put AIQ output into other deliverables: monthly client reports, board decks, crisis briefings. The platform is designed to feed those downstream uses rather than trap the data inside its own interface.

Agencies have a dedicated plan. It supports managing a portfolio of client brands from a single account, with separate topics, peers, and reports per client; white-label configuration for client-facing reports; and seat scaling for the analysts and account leads who need access. Several major PR firms and public affairs shops use AIQ this way today, either to add an AI intelligence layer to existing retainers or to differentiate in new business pitches against peers who cannot show the same data.

AIQ™ supports multi-seat accounts as a standard feature. Admins invite team members through the account settings; each invitee receives an email link and creates their own login. Role-based access controls determine who can configure topics, view results, and manage billing. Seat counts and feature access depend on the plan tier - standard plans cover small teams, agency plans support larger configurations. Agency accounts are designed for PR and communications firms that need to manage multiple client brands without cross-visibility: different account teams can be given access to different client topics, with the agency admin retaining oversight across the portfolio. The setup is now the default working configuration for the PR firms we work with.

Yes - and several do. Private equity firms, holding companies, family offices, and investor relations teams use AIQ to track AI narratives across an entire portfolio from a single account, with each portfolio company set up as its own topic with its own prompts, peers, and tags. The use case is straightforward: a portfolio of fifteen or twenty companies generates more AI mentions in a week than any analyst can manually monitor across eight engines, and the early-warning value of catching a shift inside one portfolio company before it shows up in the press is high enough to justify the platform on its own.

Yes - this is one of the highest-value use cases. A new topic can be configured in under five minutes, and the first round of AI responses comes back within 15-20 minutes. During an active situation, a comms team can stand up topics for the specific narrative threads they are tracking (a contested claim, an emerging frame, an executive name appearing in stories), watch daily as the AI engines absorb or reject each narrative, and identify which sources are driving the picture. Once the situation stabilizes, topics can be paused or removed and the subscription scaled back. We use this internally on every crisis engagement we run.

AI engines do not preserve a queryable history of what they said yesterday, so neither does AIQ. The platform begins collecting data the moment a topic is created. This is one of the practical reasons we recommend setting up topics for a brand and its key executives before a crisis arrives rather than after, and one of the reasons we set up exploratory topics for clients during onboarding even before strategy is finalized - the baseline data starts accumulating immediately.

Yes. AIQ is sold as a self-serve product and the majority of subscribers run it without any advisory engagement on the Five Blocks side. The typical pattern: an in-house comms team or agency starts a trial, sets up topics, and uses the data inside their own reporting workflow. Some of those subscribers later engage us when the data points to source-layer work they need help executing on. Others run AIQ on its own indefinitely. Both are valid uses of the platform.

Self-serve subscriptions are billed monthly through the AIQ platform via its payment processor; users manage cards, plan changes, and team seats from the My Account area. Enterprise plans are invoiced directly by Five Blocks under the standard engagement terms and are typically annual. VAT, sales tax, and B2B reverse-charge handling follow the rules for the subscriber's jurisdiction.

Topic setup is a five-step wizard inside the platform. Step one is Subject: the brand, person, product, or theme being tracked. Step two is Prompts: the specific questions the AI engines will be asked - we suggest a starter set and most users add their own. Step three is Models: which of the eight engines to query (the default is all eight). Step four is Tags: optional labels for organizing topics across a portfolio. Step five is Save, at which point the first round of queries fires automatically and initial results appear within 15-20 minutes. From there the topic polls daily on the schedule.

For each topic, AIQ runs the user's prompts against each of the eight tracked engines - ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Claude, Grok, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode - on a daily polling schedule. The full response is captured, the cited sources are extracted and classified, the sentiment is scored, and the narrative themes are tagged. The result is a longitudinal record: not just what each engine said today, but how the story has shifted week over week, which sources are gaining weight, and where the engines diverge from each other. That last point matters - the same prompt to the same brand can return materially different answers across the eight engines, and AIQ is built specifically to expose those differences.

The number of topics included depends on the plan tier, with higher tiers adding capacity and the enterprise tier scaling to whatever the engagement requires. As a benchmark, most single-brand subscribers run three to ten topics: the corporate brand, one or two executives, a couple of products or themes, and a crisis-watch topic. Portfolio investors and large agencies routinely run dozens, since each portfolio company or client gets its own topic set.

Job candidates increasingly ask AI engines about employers before they ever visit a careers page, and AIQ tracks the resulting picture. Topics for employer-brand use are built around the prompts candidates actually use: 'What is it like to work at [Company]?', 'Is [Company] a good place to work?', 'What is the culture at [Company]?', and comparative versions against named competitors. The platform shows which sources the engines are weighting (typical drivers: Glassdoor, Reddit threads, LinkedIn posts, the company's own owned content), how the answer differs across engines, and how the picture changes after the company publishes new careers content or after a media moment. The comparison view against talent-market competitors is often more useful than the absolute view.

In a traditional crisis workflow, the comms team issues a statement, places a story, and waits days or weeks to see what stuck. AIQ collapses that loop. The day after a statement is issued, the engines have polled, and the platform shows whether the official version of events has entered the AI narrative, which sources are still being weighted toward the contested version, and where the engines diverge from each other. Source attribution is critical here: it is one thing to know that ChatGPT is still telling the bad story; it is another to see that the single 2019 article driving 60% of the citations is the leverage point. We use AIQ on every crisis engagement we run, and the speed advantage compounds quickly when the situation is moving daily.

PR firms work with us in two modes. First, as a specialist partner: when a client needs Wikipedia work, source-layer Google work, or AI reputation work that sits outside the firm's core practice, we deliver it under the firm's umbrella or directly to the client at the firm's recommendation. We have done this with the major global PR firms, public affairs shops, and law-firm communications groups for two decades. Second, as a technology supplier: agencies subscribe to AIQ on the agency plan to run AI reputation audits as pitch material, add AI intelligence to existing retainers, benchmark client brands against peers, and produce white-label reports. The two modes are independent - many firms use AIQ without ever engaging us on advisory work, and vice versa.

WikiAlerts subscribes to Wikipedia's live edit feed for every page on a user's watch list. The moment a watched page is edited, an email notification goes out with a diff view showing exactly what was added, removed, or changed and by which editor account. If the change is clear vandalism, a one-click revert button rolls the edit back through the same mechanism a Wikipedia editor would use. This works because Wikipedia exposes its edit stream as a public feed - the engineering challenge is in the scale (millions of edits a day across all watched pages worldwide), the diff rendering, the email throughput, and not flooding users with notifications for trivial changes like reference reformatting.

Polling runs daily for each engine on each topic, and the full response is stored along with cited sources, sentiment, and theme tags. For a newly created topic, the first results appear within 15-20 minutes - the initial round runs immediately on save and then the daily cadence picks up. The daily cadence is deliberate: AI engine responses change frequently enough that less frequent polling misses important shifts, and frequently enough that more frequent polling rarely changes the picture meaningfully.

The day-to-day use cases inside a PR firm are concrete. New-business pitches now routinely include an AIQ audit of the prospect's current AI exposure alongside its named peers, which a firm without AIQ cannot match. Active retainers use AIQ for ongoing narrative tracking, with the platform output flowing into monthly client reports under the firm's own brand. Crisis work uses topics that spin up in minutes for the specific narrative threads the team is fighting. And competitive intelligence work uses peer comparison views to show clients exactly how they stack against named competitors across each engine.

The market for AI monitoring has settled around a small set of patterns, most of which measure the wrong thing for a comms team. The dominant pattern is visibility tracking: give the tool a list of brands and it reports how often each one appeared in AI responses for a given keyword. That tells you attendance, not performance. AIQ measures reputation: what the AI engines actually said about the brand, which sources they cited, what the sentiment was, what themes appeared, and how each of those moved over time across all eight engines simultaneously. The distinction matters because a brand can be highly visible in AI responses and still be losing the narrative, and vice versa. Visibility is a marketing metric. Reputation is a comms metric. AIQ is built for the comms metric.

AIQ™ is the diagnostic platform; the advisory services are where the work gets done. Inside an AI Reputation Management engagement, AIQ provides the source map and the narrative tracking, and Five Blocks analysts and account managers translate the data into source-layer interventions: Wikipedia work where the engines are citing Wikipedia, Knowledge Graph and Wikidata work where the engines are pulling from structured data, owned-content reorganization where the engines are missing the right pages, and coordination with the client's PR firm on placements in outlets the engines actually weight. AIQ can be used on its own, the advisory service can use AIQ data as input, and the most common configuration combines both.

IMPACT™ runs continuous Google queries against defined keyword sets for each client, executed from the correct geographic and language context for each one. Every ranking URL is classified along several dimensions: ownership (client-owned, earned, third-party, hostile), SERP feature (organic, AI Overview, People Also Ask, image, video, news, knowledge panel), and topic. Movement, share-of-voice, and competitive position are tracked over time, so a one-position drop on a critical keyword last Tuesday is visible alongside the broader trend over the prior twelve months. Account teams use this data daily to spot threats, prioritize interventions, and produce the monthly client reporting that demonstrates progress against the program's stated goals.

A pure technology vendor sells data dashboards and leaves the interpretation and action to the client. A pure services firm runs on intuition and quarterly audits. Five Blocks is built around the integration of the two. IMPACT and AIQ generate the diagnostic data continuously - every ranking shift, every AI source change, every Wikipedia edit - and the senior account team interprets it, builds the strategy, and executes the actual interventions: the Wikipedia edit requests, the structured data deployment, the source-layer content work, the coordination with the client's PR firm. The data without the execution is just a dashboard. The execution without the data is just guesswork. The integration is what produces results that survive contact with the engines.

The competitive edge is in the diagnostic depth. Off-the-shelf SEO platforms sample a few keywords a few times a week and report aggregate rankings. IMPACT™ tracks every URL on every result page for every defined keyword across 500 cities, 69 countries, and 23 languages, at daily cadence. Off-the-shelf AI tools measure visibility on one or two engines. AIQ™ tracks the full response, source attribution, and sentiment across eight engines daily. Generic Wikipedia monitors flag that a page changed; WikiAlerts™ flags the diff in real time with one-click revert. The result for clients is that we know what is actually happening across search and AI before anyone else in the room does, and the strategy reflects current state rather than last quarter's snapshot.

GEO tools, in the current market, treat AI like SEO: count the mentions, optimize for more of them. That is a marketing measurement. AIQ measures reputation: the full content of what AI engines say about a brand, the sources they cite, the sentiment, the themes, the differences across engines, and the trajectory over time. The distinction matters in practice. A brand can be mentioned in every AI response for its category and still be losing the narrative if the response describes it badly or attributes the wrong story to it. GEO would call that a win. AIQ would call it a problem. For comms and corporate affairs teams, the comms framing is the one that matches the actual job.

The three categories track different things. Social listening tools (Brandwatch, Sprout, Talkwalker) capture what people post on social platforms. Media monitoring tools (Cision, Meltwater, Critical Mention) capture what journalists publish in mainstream and trade press. AIQ captures what the AI engines say when a user asks about the brand. The first two measure inputs to the AI engines; AIQ measures the output. The reason that distinction is now critical: the AI engines synthesize across all three input categories - earned media, social posts, Wikipedia, Reddit, the brand's own owned content - into a single narrative for the user, and that synthesized narrative is increasingly what shapes perception. AIQ is the only category measuring the synthesized output rather than one of the inputs.

For every topic, AIQ runs identical prompts against ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Claude, Grok, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode in parallel, and exposes the differences directly. The multi-model comparison view sits next to the source attribution: when ChatGPT is telling one story and Gemini another, the platform shows which sources each engine is pulling from. That source-level diagnostic is the actionable layer. A brand is rarely uniformly well or badly described across all eight engines; the picture is usually mixed, and the leverage points are different per engine. AIQ shows the differences and the sources driving them, which is the information a comms team needs to decide what to do.

The four platforms cover the four layers of modern reputation: IMPACT™ for Google search, AIQ™ for AI engines, WikiAlerts™ for Wikipedia, and GeoSearch for geographic search variation. Each was built because the off-the-shelf alternatives could not produce the depth or cadence we need to do the work. The IMPACT keyword universe is roughly two orders of magnitude larger than what a typical SEO platform covers per client. AIQ polls eight engines daily where most tools cover one or two. WikiAlerts flags edits in real time where generic monitors lag by days. GeoSearch eliminates the VPN-and-proxy cycle that a comms team would otherwise need to see Google in a different market. The practical effect on engagements: strategy decisions reflect current data rather than spot checks, and threats are caught early enough to act on.

Client reporting at Five Blocks is direct from the platforms, not retrofitted from manual checks. IMPACT™ data drives the search progress section: keyword movement, share-of-voice against named peers, classification of every ranking URL, and SERP feature presence. AIQ™ drives the AI narrative section: what each of the eight engines said this period, the source attribution, the sentiment trend, and the peer comparison. WikiAlerts™ logs feed the Wikipedia activity section. Each section ties back to the program goals defined at the start of the engagement, so a CCO can show the board exactly what changed this month and how it ladders to the strategic objectives, with the underlying data available on request.

International reputation work runs into the same problem constantly: a SERP that looks fine in New York can look hostile in Frankfurt, Singapore, or Sao Paulo. Google personalizes by city, country, language, and device, and the differences can be material. GeoSearch was built so we can run a query as a real searcher would see it in any of hundreds of specific locations, instantly, without the operational overhead of VPNs and proxy chains. We use it constantly: checking whether a critical article is dominating in a single market, validating Wikipedia visibility by country, diagnosing why an investor in Tokyo is seeing a different narrative than one in London. The data also feeds into IMPACT for clients whose programs require geographic depth.

A typical week on an engagement runs through the platforms several times. The account manager reviews IMPACT each morning for keyword movement and any new threats; the strategist reviews AIQ for shifts in AI source attribution and sentiment; WikiAlerts notifications get triaged as they arrive. From that continuous read, the team produces prioritized recommendations: which Wikipedia edit request to file next, which source needs to be strengthened or replaced, which schema markup change will materially affect entity recognition, which media placement to coordinate with the client's PR firm. The recommendations are the work product the client actually sees; the platforms are the analytical layer underneath. Clients see the recommendations and the data side by side in monthly reports.

AIQ is organized around topics, and each topic exposes several views. The Responses view shows the full text of what every engine said this period and historically. The Sources view shows which domains, articles, and Wikipedia sections are being cited and how that distribution is shifting. The Themes view tags the narrative themes appearing across responses and shows their movement. The Sentiment view scores positive, neutral, and negative framing per engine and over time. The Peers view runs the same prompts and analysis against named peers so the brand can be compared directly. Export is available on every view as screenshot, CSV, or JSON.

An AIQ Snapshot is a single point-in-time view rather than a tracking program: three AI engines, four questions, one brand or one person, captured and packaged for immediate use. PR firms use Snapshots in new-business pitches to show prospects how AI is currently describing them and their peers. In-house teams use them to brief a CEO before a meeting or to spot-check a sensitive moment. They sit alongside the full AIQ™ subscription rather than replacing it: the Snapshot is the photograph; the subscription is the time-lapse.

IMPACT™ tracks every URL appearing on Google's results pages for a client's defined keyword set, across 500 cities, 69 countries, and 23 languages. Each ranking URL is classified by ownership (client-owned, earned media, third-party, hostile), by SERP feature (organic, AI Overview, People Also Ask, knowledge panel, image, video, news), and by topic. The platform records peer rankings against named competitors and stores the full time series. The output is roughly 100 million data points per day across the active client base.

Standard IMPACT™ reports include keyword ranking and movement by geography, share-of-voice for the client and its named peer set, URL-level ownership classification (which results are owned, earned, third-party, or hostile), SERP feature presence, and competitive benchmark dashboards. Time-series exports power the monthly client reports, with each report tying back to the program's stated objectives so movement is interpretable rather than just descriptive. Custom views are common - most engagements add at least one client-specific cut.

After cancellation, all historical data remains accessible inside the account for 90 days, which is enough time for a user to export everything they need in CSV, JSON, or screenshot form. After the 90-day window, the data is removed in line with our data retention and privacy policy. Subscriptions can be paused rather than cancelled in cases where a team wants to suspend monitoring during a quiet period but preserve the data and configuration for later.

GEO tools are descendants of the SEO toolset, built around the question marketing teams ask: how often are we showing up. AIQ is built around the question comms and corporate affairs teams ask: what is actually being said about us, by which sources, with what sentiment, and how is it changing. The marketing question and the comms question are both legitimate, but they call for different tools, and a CCO trying to use a visibility tracker to do narrative management is using the wrong instrument. AIQ is the comms instrument.

Generic monitoring tools - the Google Alert variety, basic mention trackers - can flag that a Wikipedia page changed, but the value is in the detail and the speed. WikiAlerts™ ingests Wikipedia's live edit stream rather than polling on a schedule, so the alert hits within minutes of an edit. The email contains the full diff, so a comms team can see exactly which sentence was changed and by which account, not just that the page was touched. The one-click revert button rolls back clear vandalism through the same mechanism a Wikipedia editor would use. For corporate pages, executive biographies, and any article where small wording changes have outsize narrative consequences, that combination - speed, detail, ability to act - is the difference between knowing and being able to respond.