Perspective: tracking is the easy half
We built ecentic because we think most stores are asking the wrong question. “How many visits did ChatGPT send us?” is a fine question. “Why did the agent pick our competitor’s product instead of ours?” is the one that moves orders.
An AI shopping agent never sees your homepage. It reads your product feed, your catalog and the structured data on product pages. If the data is wrong, thin or contradictory, the agent picks someone else, and no click ever happens, so no analytics tool shows you the loss. Your chart just looks quiet.
We’ve seen how stark this gets. By October 2026 we had run 36,797 simulated purchases, and on the same catalog ChatGPT picked the product about 3x as often as Claude or Gemini (51.6% vs about 18.5%). The same products, three different answers. In an anonymous audit of a spirits marketplace doing about €70M a year, 88% of its 9,699 products had a fault in the data agents read, and agents named it 0 times in 20 when asked where to buy two bottles it stocks. Strong brand, fine website, invisible to the agent.

Our first pilot, DUA Flavours, saw visits from AI assistants and direct traffic rise 12% from April to July 2026. That is a visits number, not sales, and it’s one pilot. Fair caveat: ecentic is pre-revenue and still running pilots, so treat that as an early signal, not proof.
There’s also a checkout side. Buying inside the AI answer is live on Google’s AI Mode and Gemini in the US through UCP, Google’s open standard for agent checkout. ChatGPT links to the store’s own checkout instead. OpenAI has ACP, Google has UCP, Amazon has a wall. Whichever way your shoppers buy, the agent has to find your product, trust the data and get through checkout. In another audit, a Swedish skincare brand’s agent checkouts reached payment in 0 of 6 countries because a shipping setting asked for a phone number. No analytics report would have shown that, because the agent just left.
— Xhurian Shaba