I run a site and get around 60–70 clicks a day from Bing, while Google barely gives me 1–2. So if you think ChatGPT just shows Bing results, that’s not true. ChatGPT only uses Bing’s index API as infrastructure, then filters what it thinks is most relevant.
For example, I’ve got one page that ranks #1 on Bing and brings me 25–30 clicks daily. But if I ask ChatGPT the same keyword, it doesn’t show my page at all. Instead, it pulls from places like Trustpilot, Reddit, forums, etc. ChatGPT is closer to Google’s E-E-A-T framework. It looks for sources it thinks are more authoritative or genuine, not just SEO-optimized blogs.
So yeah, Bing search still works on traditional SEO, but ChatGPT is AI. It’s not going to just mirror Bing’s rankings. From what I’ve seen in my analytics (I use Microsoft Clarity), traffic comes from Bing search, DuckDuckGo, Brave, etc. But not from ChatGPT. That’s my experience.
ChatGPT with browsing doesn’t have its own index. It just sends a query to the Bing API, pulls back a handful of URLs, and then processes those pages in real time. That means if your site is blocked by robots.txt, hidden behind heavy JavaScript, slow to load, or unclear semantically, it simply won’t make it into the answer. Clean, crawlable pages with clear headings, modular sections, and content that matches the users queries word for word have the best chance of being included.
Bing Copilot works a little differently. It’s tied into Bing’s search infrastructure, so classic SEO signals still matter a lot. You need both keyword clarity and semantic coverage, since Bing uses hybrid retrieval. Strong technical hygiene (fast loads, canonical signals, clean HTML etc) makes a difference, and content should be short, self-contained paragraphs, lists, or tables that can be lifted directly into answers.
In both cases, authority signals (EEAT), entity schema, and freshness also matter a lot. Even things like providing reusable formats (tables, checklists) can improve the odds of a citation.
Bing is a reverse engineered Google but the Keyword groupings/targets are different
I run a site and get around 60–70 clicks a day from Bing, while Google barely gives me 1–2. So if you think ChatGPT just shows Bing results, that’s not true. ChatGPT only uses Bing’s index API as infrastructure, then filters what it thinks is most relevant.
For example, I’ve got one page that ranks #1 on Bing and brings me 25–30 clicks daily. But if I ask ChatGPT the same keyword, it doesn’t show my page at all. Instead, it pulls from places like Trustpilot, Reddit, forums, etc. ChatGPT is closer to Google’s E-E-A-T framework. It looks for sources it thinks are more authoritative or genuine, not just SEO-optimized blogs.
So yeah, Bing search still works on traditional SEO, but ChatGPT is AI. It’s not going to just mirror Bing’s rankings. From what I’ve seen in my analytics (I use Microsoft Clarity), traffic comes from Bing search, DuckDuckGo, Brave, etc. But not from ChatGPT. That’s my experience.
ChatGPT with browsing doesn’t have its own index. It just sends a query to the Bing API, pulls back a handful of URLs, and then processes those pages in real time. That means if your site is blocked by robots.txt, hidden behind heavy JavaScript, slow to load, or unclear semantically, it simply won’t make it into the answer. Clean, crawlable pages with clear headings, modular sections, and content that matches the users queries word for word have the best chance of being included.
Bing Copilot works a little differently. It’s tied into Bing’s search infrastructure, so classic SEO signals still matter a lot. You need both keyword clarity and semantic coverage, since Bing uses hybrid retrieval. Strong technical hygiene (fast loads, canonical signals, clean HTML etc) makes a difference, and content should be short, self-contained paragraphs, lists, or tables that can be lifted directly into answers.
In both cases, authority signals (EEAT), entity schema, and freshness also matter a lot. Even things like providing reusable formats (tables, checklists) can improve the odds of a citation.