Do we need to fix every engine separately?

One web, five readers

There is no version of your pricing page for Perplexity and another for Gemini. The five engines read the same pages, the same directory listings, the same threads, and the same comparison pages, so a rewrite of the page you own, a correction request to a listing, or a new page that answers the question better serves all of them at once. The fix list is written per source, not per engine.

What differs is the reading. Perplexity and Google AI Mode look things up on every answer, so once the fixed page is recrawled they tend to drop the claim first. ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot mix a live lookup with what the model already holds, and a claim the model memorised in training can outlast the page that used to carry it. That kind only shifts when the model is retrained, and we tell you when that is what you are looking at.

Where the engines differ in what they trust

Each engine also has its own favourites among the sources. The cited-domains table, per engine, shows which listings, threads, and publications each one leans on for your prompts. An engine that keeps quoting a review site after your own page is fixed is telling you which source needs the correction request next. That is the one place the work does get aimed at a single engine: not a different fix, but the same fix applied to the source that engine happens to favour.

How the record keeps it straight

The prompt that surfaced the claim runs daily on every engine and in every country you track, and the accuracy log records the day each one stopped repeating it. So the question of which engines still need a push is never a matter of somebody checking one engine once. It is a row in the log, with the source that engine is still citing beside it.