Nasdaq SMARTS owns trade surveillance on Gemini.
Eventus owns everything else.
48 of 60 citations. 34 first-place rankings — more than Nasdaq SMARTS and NICE Actimize hold between them. And on the five queries about trade surveillance itself, the exact phrase in Eventus’s own headline, Gemini returns zero.
This audit uses the Xtrusio methodology — a 20-query, three-platform framework designed to surface how AI platforms surface (or omit) B2B vendors during discovery-phase research by decision-makers.
Queries were written from the perspective of surveillance and compliance leaders evaluating trade surveillance platforms — not from vendor category listings.
Frank AI shipped in October 2025 and ranks #1 on every platform that retrieves it. Trade Surveillance has shipped since 2015 and scores 0 of 5 on Gemini.
The newest module in the portfolio is the most visible one. The founding product — the one the homepage calls Eventus a “global leader” in — is the least visible. Across 60 responses Eventus was cited 48 times against Nasdaq SMARTS’s 27, yet on the five core surveillance questions Gemini named Nasdaq SMARTS, NICE Actimize, Trapets, LSEG and Trading Technologies, and never named Eventus once.
Platform Scorecard
Where Eventus is found, and where the buyer sees someone else
Every one of the 20 questions was put to ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini in the same wording. The spread between the strongest and weakest platform is 40 percentage points — the widest single-platform gap in any surveillance-category audit run to date.
AI Visibility Leaderboard
Who owns the surveillance conversation — total citations across all three platforms
AI Positioning Audit
20 buyer-intent queries — click any row to see the exact question
Every query was written from the perspective of a named, verified decision-maker researching trade surveillance during discovery — before any vendor shortlist exists. No question names Eventus or any competitor. These are the people whose AI answers decide whether Eventus enters the evaluation at all.
| # | Query Topic | Product Line | Claude | ChatGPT | Gemini |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Multi-asset consolidation | Trade Surveillance | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We’re a mid-size broker-dealer running equities, options and futures on three separate systems. What trade surveillance platforms can cover all three asset classes in one place without us building custom integrations?” | |||||
| 2 | Raw-format data onboarding | Digital Asset & 24/7 | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#2 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Our current surveillance vendor takes months to onboard a new data feed because they need it converted into their format first. Are there providers that can ingest order and trade data in whatever raw format we already have?” | |||||
| 3 | Cross-product insider trading | Trade Surveillance | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “What are the best trade surveillance systems for detecting insider trading across equities and options together, rather than reviewing each book separately?” | |||||
| 4 | Comms + trade correlation | Trade Surveillance | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We need to correlate trader chat and voice recordings with the trades themselves during market abuse investigations. Which vendors do communications and trade surveillance in a single platform?” | |||||
| 5 | Pre-built regulatory rule packs | Trade Surveillance | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Which trade surveillance vendors ship pre-built procedures for MAR, MiFID II and FINRA rules so we’re not writing detection logic from scratch for every jurisdiction?” | |||||
| 6 | RTS 6 real-time algo alerting | Algo Monitoring | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We run algorithmic strategies and need alerts generated within seconds to satisfy RTS 6. Which vendors do genuine real-time algo monitoring rather than T+1 batch review?” | |||||
| 7 | Cross-venue algo behaviour | Algo Monitoring | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#2 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “What software can monitor algo behaviour like excessive messaging, duplicated orders and runaway algos across multiple exchanges in one view?” | |||||
| 8 | Drop-copy aggregation | Algo Monitoring | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Our algo monitoring is fed by drop copies from a dozen venues plus internal systems. Which vendors can aggregate all of that into a single real-time monitoring layer?” | |||||
| 9 | Pre-trade risk control validation | Risk Controls | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “How do firms independently verify that their pre-trade risk controls and financial limits are actually working as intended? Is there software that tests this continuously?” | |||||
| 10 | Supervisory procedure evidence | Risk Controls | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We need to evidence to auditors that our written supervisory procedures are genuinely being followed on the trading desk. What technology supports that?” | |||||
| 11 | Enterprise bank-wide conduct risk | Trade Surveillance | ✓#11 | ✓#4 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Which market conduct and surveillance platforms do large global banks use for enterprise-wide monitoring across all their business lines?” | |||||
| 12 | Plain-English analyst queries | Frank AI | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#3 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “My compliance analysts can’t write SQL. Is there a surveillance tool where they can ask questions about trading activity in plain English and get reliable answers back?” | |||||
| 13 | Explainable, deterministic AI | Frank AI | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✓#3 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Regulators are asking us to explain how our AI reaches its conclusions. Which compliance AI tools produce deterministic, auditable, repeatable outputs rather than probabilistic answers?” | |||||
| 14 | On-premises AI deployment | Frank AI | ✓#1 | ✓#1 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We can’t send trading data to a third-party AI service. Are there surveillance vendors offering AI capabilities that run fully on-premises inside our own environment?” | |||||
| 15 | 24/7 crypto exchange scale | Digital Asset & 24/7 | ✓#1 | ✓#3 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We operate a crypto exchange trading 24/7 with billions of messages a day. Which surveillance platforms can genuinely handle that volume in real time?” | |||||
| 16 | Crypto-native wash trading | Digital Asset & 24/7 | ✓#2 | ✓#4 | ✗ |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “What surveillance tools are purpose-built for crypto-native risks like wash trading across wallets and cross-chain manipulation?” | |||||
| 17 | Overnight & 24-hour sessions | Risk Controls | ✓#1 | ✓#2 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Our equities desk is moving to overnight and near-24-hour sessions. How are firms adapting surveillance and risk controls for markets that never close?” | |||||
| 18 | Event contract exchange launch | Prediction Markets | ✓#1 | ✓#2 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “We’re launching a CFTC-regulated event contract exchange. Which trade surveillance providers have real experience with prediction markets rather than repurposing equities models?” | |||||
| 19 | Real-world outcome insider trading | Prediction Markets | ✗ | ✓#2 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “How do you detect insider trading in event contracts where the material non-public information concerns a real-world outcome rather than a company? Which surveillance vendors handle that?” | |||||
| 20 | Prediction market incumbency | Prediction Markets | ✓#2 | ✓#2 | ✓#1 |
Exact question asked across all three AI platforms: “Which surveillance vendors do the largest prediction market operators actually use today?” | |||||
| TOTAL | 18/20 (90%) | 19/20 (95%) | 11/20 (55%) | ||
▹ #1 indicates Eventus was named first in that platform’s answer. 34 of the 48 citations are first-place rankings.
The Gemini Blackout
Zero of five on the product the homepage is named after
Gemini cited Eventus 11 times out of 20 — respectable in isolation. The problem is which nine it missed. Every core trade surveillance question is in the miss column, and the misses are not random: they cluster precisely on the claims Eventus makes on its own homepage and product pages.
“We’re a mid-size broker-dealer running equities, options and futures on three separate systems. What trade surveillance platforms can cover all three asset classes in one place?”
“Which vendors ship pre-built procedures for MAR, MiFID II and FINRA rules so we’re not writing detection logic from scratch for every jurisdiction?”
“We can’t send trading data to a third-party AI service. Are there vendors offering AI that runs fully on-premises inside our own environment?”
ChatGPT and Claude both ran live web research and returned 95% and 90%. Both named Rothera (28 July 2026), Novig (June 2026) and the Kalshi–Solidus deal by name. Gemini searched nothing and returned 55%, answering the prediction-market questions in general terms with no deployment named — it did not know those events had happened.
The 40-point spread is not a model preference. It is the difference between a platform that reads eventus.com and one that answers from memory. Eventus’s owned pages are excellent retrieval targets; its presence in model memory is roughly half that. As more AI answers are generated without a search step, 55% is the number that matters.
AI Topic Authority Map
Query heatmap — product line × platform
The 20 queries map to the six lines Eventus actually sells. Read down the Gemini column: the newest modules are visible and the founding product is not.
| Capability | AI Leader | Eventus Status |
|---|---|---|
| Real-time algo monitoring (RTS 6) | Eventus | UNANIMOUS #1 (3/3) |
| Drop-copy aggregation across venues | Eventus | UNANIMOUS #1 (3/3) |
| Raw-format data ingestion | Eventus | UNANIMOUS #1 (3/3) |
| Deterministic, explainable AI | Eventus | All 3 platforms (3/3) |
| 24/7 crypto venue scale | Eventus | All 3 platforms (3/3) |
| Overnight & 24-hour sessions | Eventus | All 3 platforms (3/3) |
| Prediction & event contract surveillance | Solidus Labs | Cited 3/3, but ranked #2 |
| Pre-trade risk control validation | Eventus | 2 of 3 platforms |
| Supervisory procedure evidence | Eventus | 2 of 3 platforms |
| On-premises AI deployment | Eventus / NICE Actimize | 2 of 3 — Gemini miss |
| Multi-asset consolidation | Nasdaq SMARTS | 2 of 3 — Gemini miss |
| Pre-built regulatory rule packs | Nasdaq SMARTS | 2 of 3 — Gemini miss |
| Crypto-native on-chain risk | Solidus Labs | 2 of 3 — Gemini miss |
| Enterprise bank-wide conduct risk | NICE Actimize & Nasdaq | Worst rank on all 3 |
| Communications + trade surveillance | NICE Actimize / Behavox | INVISIBLE (0/3) |
5 queries
3 queries
3 queries
3 queries
3 queries
3 queries
▹ Trade Surveillance — the founding product and the phrase in the company name’s own tagline — is the only line scoring 0% on any platform.
Methodology
How this Xtrusio AEO/GEO Audit was conducted
This research is based on Xtrusio’s proprietary AI visibility analysis framework, run against eventus.com in August 2026.
Recommendations
Closing the Gemini gap on the founding product
- Frank AI is the highest-yield page in the portfolio — six #1 rankings, with the deterministic / auditable / on-premises framing quoted back near-verbatim. Reverse-engineer why: short declarative capability statements, each claim standing alone, no marketing wrapper.
- Apply the same treatment to the Trade Surveillance, Risk Controls and Validus Overview pages. The claims are already true and already on the site — they are simply not written in a form models lift.
- Publish a single explicit page listing all 150+ procedures by jurisdiction (SEC, FINRA, CFTC, NFA, MAR, MiFID II, MAS, SFC, JFSA, ASIC). Q5 was lost to Trapets and LSEG on a claim Eventus can evidence better than either.
- State the multi-asset consolidation claim as a standalone sentence naming equities, options, futures, FX, fixed income and digital assets in one platform. Q1 is the homepage headline and Gemini did not connect it.
- Q11 is the worst result on every platform — absent on Gemini, 4th on ChatGPT, 11th on Claude. All three describe Eventus as an RTS 6 layer bolted onto a Nasdaq or NICE core. Eight WatersTechnology integrated-platform awards are not shifting this.
- Publish named, structured bank and FCM deployments with scope stated explicitly — asset classes covered, lines of defense, jurisdictions, message volumes. Awards are not being read as evidence; deployments are.
- Decide the communications surveillance position publicly. Q4 is a clean zero on all three platforms and NICE Actimize, SteelEye and Behavox own the holistic conduct frame uncontested. Either announce an integration partner or state the deliberate boundary — silence lets competitors define it in RFPs.
- ChatGPT and Claude independently arrived at the same split: Solidus for wallet, identity and on-chain risk graphs; Eventus for centralised order book, DCM core principles and supervisory workflow. That segmentation is durable and currently caps Eventus at #2 in its fastest-growing segment.
- Kalshi outweighs Novig and Rothera combined as a named reference. Either land a comparable logo or publish original prediction-market research — Solidus’s Polymarket work is being cited as domain depth even though it is not a customer relationship.
- Quarterly Xtrusio re‑audits to track whether Gemini’s core-surveillance score moves off zero.
Gemini has never heard of your best product.
Let’s fix the five queries that decide the shortlist.
This research report was generated using the Xtrusio Company Intelligence Module.
