Finding 07
We kept FAQ markup Google had stopped rewarding, aimed at AI assistants
FAQPage markup stopped producing rich results years ago. A lead generation site shipped it anyway, as a signal to answer engines, and 27 of its 153 sessions in the following eleven weeks came from an AI assistant. Its contact actions are not reported here, because two reports of them do not agree.
In plain terms
A lead generation site shipped FAQ markup that Google had stopped showing as rich results, aiming it at AI assistants. In the next eleven weeks, 27 of its 153 visits came from an AI assistant. These figures do not show whether the markup brought any visits. Its contact actions are not reported: two reports of them disagree.
- Published
- Window
- 2026-06-11 launch to 2026-08-25
- Sample
- 153 sessions, of which 27 from an AI assistant
- Instrument
- Google Analytics visits by source on a separate lead generation site, from its launch on 2026-06-11 to 2026-08-25.
In 2023 Google stopped showing FAQ rich results for almost every site. The structured data that fed them kept working, kept validating, and stopped producing anything visible. Most sites removed it, which was the rational response to the stated change.
On one property we kept shipping it, for a reason recorded in source before any outcome was known: not for Google rich results, but as a machine-readable statement of what each service answers, aimed at systems that read pages rather than render them.
The property
A lead generation site in a specialist professional field. We built the website; a third party runs the service and the client relationships, and these figures are published with their permission. Nothing here describes their business beyond the site's own traffic.
FAQPage markup shipped on every service page from launch. The instrumentation, which recorded where each contact action originated, shipped at the same time.
What happened
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Window | 11 weeks |
| Sessions | 153 |
| AI assistant sessions | 27 |
What this is not
This is not proof that FAQ markup caused the assistant traffic. The schema shipped first and the traffic followed, and that ordering is recorded in version control, but nothing here isolates the schema from everything else that shipped alongside it. It is a sequence, not an experiment.
The channel itself is small: 27 AI assistant sessions out of 153. One window of that size does not establish a lasting traffic pattern.
The site also records contact actions: taps that open a messaging app, a phone call or an email, and form submissions. Two reports of them disagree, so none is given here.
The part that holds regardless
The companion finding measures the assistant channel on a utility property, where it came to about one percent of traffic. Here it was 27 of 153 sessions. What either is worth depends on what a visit leads to, which this page does not measure.
How to check your own
Instrument the contact action, not the page view, and record the surface it came from. Then let it run before drawing on it. Check that the reports use the same event definitions, filters and reporting window, and reconcile any differences before quoting their counts. Give the count and what it is divided by beside any rate. Before relying on the rate, assess how uncertain it is and whether it is useful for the decision.
Full method
GA4 sessions by source on a separate property, built by the same author for a third party and published with their permission. FAQPage schema shipped deliberately on every service page as an answer engine signal rather than for Google rich results, with the decision recorded in source before any outcome was known. Contact actions were recorded too; two reports of them disagree, so no count, breakdown or rate is given.