A VISIT industry report
Why ratings and reviews now decide which hotels and experiences get recommended.
Introduction
For twenty years the game was search. That game still exists, but a new one has started on top of it. Travelers now ask ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity where to stay in Gothenburg with two kids, or which northern lights tour in Tromsø is best. Instead of ten pages of links, they get one shortlist of three to five names.
This report is built on twenty-seven published sources: industry studies of AI hotel and experience visibility running to millions of data points, academic work from Northwestern and Cornell, consumer surveys across Europe and the Nordics, the official ranking documentation of the experience marketplaces, and the first dedicated analysis of the Swedish travel sector in AI search. It also carries three interviews with Nordic operators in Sweden, Iceland and Norway, and the view of two AI search specialists.
01
Asking a chatbot to plan a holiday was a novelty in 2024. It is now mainstream behavior, growing at a pace the industry has not seen since online booking arrived.
Key takeaway
These are not window-shoppers. A traveler who asks AI for a shortlist arrives pre-qualified: they asked a specific question and got a specific answer.
In 2024, asking a chatbot to plan your holiday was a novelty. Today it is mainstream behavior, and the growth curves are steep in every market that has been measured.
56% of US travelers used AI for at least one trip in the past year, up from 43% a year earlier. In Europe, AI use in travel planning nearly doubled in one year, from 10% to 18%, led by Gen Z and Millennial travelers. In Sweden, 27% of travelers now use AI when booking, an increase of 57% in a single year, and half of Swedes say they would consider switching destination on an AI recommendation.
Phocuswright · European Travel Commission · Adyen Index 2025 · Momondo
Industry analysis presented by Precis and Profound projects that 25% of traditional search traffic will have moved to AI-driven search by the end of 2026, and that roughly 60% of searches now end without a click. Referral traffic to travel sites from generative AI grew 3,500% year over year, and after ChatGPT began surfacing links more prominently in May 2026 the share of answers containing a URL jumped from about 4.5% to over 20%, roughly doubling referrals overnight.
Precis × Profound, May 2026 · Adobe Analytics
Our largest inbound markets, Germany, the UK, the US and the Netherlands, are exactly the markets where AI trip planning is growing fastest. When a family in Hamburg asks an assistant, in German, where to stay in Åre or what to do in Copenhagen with children, the answer is being assembled right now, from data most Nordic businesses have never actively managed.
The shift, in six numbers
of the world's hotel supply is visible in AI search results. The other 84% are effectively invisible.
HotelWorld AI, 2.36M data points
of hotels recommended by AI never appear in Google's top organic results.
Tharro
of what AI knows about a brand comes from third-party pages, not your own site.
HotelWorld AI
the conversion rate. ChatGPT visitors convert at 11.4%, organic at 5.3%.
Similarweb
of Swedish travelers now use AI when booking holidays, up 57% in a single year.
Adyen Index 2025
of European travelers use AI in trip planning, nearly double the 10% of one year earlier.
European Travel Commission
Share of visitors who book
Similarweb, hotel websites, via eHotelier 2026 · scale 0 to 12.5%
Key takeaway
An AI referral is worth roughly two organic visits. The traffic is smaller today, and each visit is worth more.
Expert view
Traditional search gives people links. AI search gives them a researched shortlist. Adobe's June 2026 travel data shows AI-referred visitors spending 70% longer on site and bouncing 41% less. That is the behaviour of someone who has already researched, compared and narrowed the field.
People are building persistent context and trust with their AI assistants, and those assistants are increasingly shaping which brands even enter consideration. Most competitors are still optimizing for the click. Brands that build AI authority now have a rare chance to become the default recommendation before the market catches up. Search may win the final click. AI increasingly wins the decision before it.
Dardan SelmaniSenior Performance Marketing & AI Expert, VISIT
Key takeaway
The AI answer has become the new first impression, the position Google's first page held for two decades.
It is worth being honest about the counterpoint, because it is real. Travelers do not hand their holiday to a chatbot.
Expedia's research found that while 39% use AI to research trips, only 8% rely on chatbots as their main planning tool, and 68% still prefer to book with brands they trust. The answers can be wrong: roughly a third of travelers report receiving incorrect or incomplete information from an AI assistant.
Expedia Group, The AI Trust Gap, 2026
But note what travelers actually do with that mistrust. They treat the AI shortlist as a starting point, then verify it themselves: they check the reviews, open the website, compare on an OTA. The verification step does not undo the shortlist. It confirms it.
Which means the strategic question is not whether travelers believe AI. It is whether you are among the three to five names they are handed to go and verify. Everything downstream of that, your website, your photography, your rate, only gets a turn if you made the cut.
02
An AI assistant searches the open web, reads what it finds, and composes an answer. The properties it names are the ones it could find, verify and describe with confidence.
It weights reviews and independent mentions far more heavily, because that's the evidence you can't write yourself.
James PerrottSEO & AEO Director, Precis
Every major study reaches the same conclusion: AI systems build their picture of your business primarily from third-party sources.
of brand mentions in AI answers come from third-party pages
of citations were the hotel's own domain
HotelWorld AI · Tharro, 695 unbranded hotel searches
AI models scan anywhere from 8 to 58 sources to answer a single query, and the properties that survive into the final answer are the ones that look strong across most of them.
Your website still matters, as the place AI verifies facts and the place travelers finally land. But the decision about whether you get recommended at all is made out there: on Google, on TripAdvisor, on Booking.com, in reviews and forums and travel blogs you do not own and cannot edit.
This is the uncomfortable part of the shift. Two decades of digital marketing taught the industry to invest in the assets it controls. The evidence AI weighs most heavily is precisely the evidence you cannot write yourself.
Section 04
Leans on TripAdvisor, cited in roughly 95% of hotel answer runs. A property weak on TripAdvisor is close to absent here.
Leans on Booking.com at about 63%, plus Google Business Profile and Maps data. Your Google record is doing the talking.
Official websites and OTAs. Fewer sources per answer, which means higher influence per source.
You cannot pick one platform and win. A property strong on TripAdvisor but weak on Google wins in Perplexity and loses in Gemini. The ones that survive into the final answer look strong everywhere.
Tharro · Yext, 6.8M citations across 1.6M queries per model
Key takeaway
Your review profile does not just get you into the answer. It decides how the answer describes you.
AI assistants are cautious by design. They recommend what they can support with evidence, and in travel the richest, most machine-readable evidence that a business is good is its review profile.
In Tharro's analysis, review volume and star class predicted AI recommendation better than guest rating itself. A 4.4-star property with 2,000 reviews beats a 4.9 with 40.
"Great for families." "Ten minutes from the harbour." "The guide spoke perfect German." Princeton research found that quotable, specific content boosts visibility in AI answers by up to 40%.
Aggarwal et al., GEO, KDD 2024
A sparse, stale or unanswered review profile does not look neutral to an AI system. It looks like an absence of evidence, and in a machine-generated shortlist of five, absence of evidence means absence.
Precis and Profound measured not only how often Swedish travel brands appear in AI answers, but how positively AI describes them. Visibility and sentiment turn out to be different things, and the gap between them is instructive.
Share of brand mentions carrying positive sentiment
Precis × Profound, Swedish travel sector, May 2026. Cited with permission.
Key takeaway
Ryanair, shown in the lighter tone, is highly visible and poorly described. High visibility with low sentiment buys awareness, not endorsement.
Key takeaway
You do not need to out-review Scandic. You need to own your niche, in the languages your guests actually write in.
Until recently everything in this report rested on global data. In May 2026, Precis and Profound presented the first dedicated analysis of the Swedish travel sector in AI search. It confirms the global picture and adds five pieces of local nuance.
Liseberg is the most visible Swedish travel brand in its category, appearing in 91% of amusement-park queries. Strömma leads archipelago tours, SkiStar leads ski resorts, and Scandic wins hotels through sheer breadth. These are precisely the brands with the deepest, freshest review profiles in their categories.
ICEHOTEL tops winter-activity queries on a modest 5.5% share of voice overall. A focused, distinctive reputation in one category outperforms broad mediocrity, which is the strategic opening for smaller Nordic operators.
In city-tour queries the most visible "brand" is GetYourGuide, a marketplace rather than an operator. When operators neglect their own review evidence, AI hands the recommendation to whoever aggregates it.
In Swedish-language answers the most-cited single domain is not TripAdvisor. It is Reddit, at 2.67% of citations, followed by a long tail of local .se domains; TripAdvisor's Swedish site accounts for just 0.84%. The global hierarchy holds for international guests asking in English and German. For domestic travelers, community discussion carries unusual weight.
Our inbound guests review us in German, English, Dutch and French, and they ask AI for recommendations in those languages too. In the biggest European markets travelers post reviews at high rates: 70% in the UK, 64% in France, 60% in Germany. A Nordic business whose review profile is rich in the languages of its key source markets is handing AI exactly the evidence it needs to answer a German or British traveler's question. Responding in the guest's language strengthens the signal further, and is read by the next hundred prospective guests from that market.
Share of category mentions won by the leading brand
Precis × Profound, May 2026. Liseberg appears in 91% of amusement-park queries. Scale 0 to 20%.
Key takeaway
ICEHOTEL wins its category on the smallest share of voice on this chart. Depth in one niche beats breadth across many.
03
Reviews influencing business results is not new. What is new is that the same signals which used to nudge a traveler's decision now decide whether the traveler hears your name at all.
Key takeaway
Review count correlates with revenue more strongly than star rating does. Getting reviewed is the first job; getting reviewed well is the second.
Volume is the least glamorous of the four signals and the one with the most evidence behind it. It works as a threshold: below a certain count you are not in the conversation, and the first few reviews do more than any later hundred.
higher purchase likelihood with just five reviews versus none
more revenue for businesses with above-average review counts
Spiegel Research Center, Northwestern · Womply, 200,000 businesses
The pattern holds in local search too: a top-three Google local result carries 47 reviews on average, against 38 at ranks seven to ten.
The Womply finding is the one worth dwelling on: across 200,000 businesses, review count correlated with revenue more strongly than star rating did. And in AI recommendations specifically, Tharro found volume and star class outweighing guest rating as predictors.
For a small operator this is good news. You cannot manufacture a 4.9 average, but you can systematically ask every guest.
Key takeaway
Below 4.0 you disappear before anyone reads a word. Above 4.7 the gains reverse. A steady stream beats a historical total.
A one-point increase in aggregate review score, on a 100-point scale, is associated with 1.42% higher RevPAR, plus 0.89% ADR and 0.54% occupancy.
Anderson, Cornell Center for Hospitality Research
4.0 is the most common consumer rating filter. Below it you are excluded before anyone reads a word. But perfection backfires: purchase likelihood peaks between 4.0 and 4.7 stars, because a flawless score reads as filtered. In hospitality, travelers are 3.9 times more likely to choose the higher-rated of two equally priced hotels, and 76% will pay more for it.
ReviewTrackers · Northwestern · TrustYou
A 0.1-star improvement lifts conversion by 25%, and moving from 3.5 to 3.7 stars has been linked to 120% conversion growth. The curve is steepest exactly where most businesses sit.
Uberall, 64,000 locations
73% of consumers pay attention only to reviews written in the last month, and both GetYourGuide and Viator confirm that recent reviews weigh more heavily in their rankings. A profile that was excellent in 2024 and silent since tells humans and machines the same story: something changed.
BrightLocal · GetYourGuide · Viator
Key takeaway
This field is young and most studies show correlation, not proven causation. What gives the picture credibility is convergence: independent studies, different methods, the same four signals.
Of the four signals, this is the one almost entirely within your control, and the one most often treated as optional.
The definitive study, published in Harvard Business Review, followed thousands of hotels on TripAdvisor. Those that began responding to reviews received 12% more reviews, and their ratings rose by an average of 0.12 stars. Responding does not just answer the record; it changes it.
Proserpio & Zervas, Marketing Science / HBR, 2017 to 2018
High-visibility brands respond to 80.5% of their reviews at an average response time of 2.1 days. More than 80% of consumers say businesses should respond to all reviews, not only the bad ones.
SOCi, Local Visibility Index
Every response is indexed, crawlable text attached to your profile: content an AI system can read and quote. A reply describing your renovated spa or your new family package is marketing copy placed exactly where the machines are looking, in the guest's own language.
04
"Which platform matters most?" is the most common question in reputation strategy. The answer depends on what you sell, and three Nordic operators show what the work looks like in practice.
Key takeaway
The engines disagree about which source to trust, so the only robust strategy is a consistent profile everywhere. Think of it as compound interest.
This report divides the industry into two master categories. STAYS is every business selling overnight accommodation: hotels, resorts, hostels, B&Bs, cabins, campsites. EXPERIENCES is every business selling ticketed activities. If you sell stays, your platforms rank in this order.
Feeds Gemini, AI Overviews and every Maps-grounded answer. It is the single most-read data source about your property, and the one most often left half-complete.
The most-cited hospitality source in AI answers, and it anchors Perplexity almost entirely. Weak here means close to invisible in one of the three major engines.
Verified-stay credibility at volume. Booking.com leads Gemini's citations for hotels, which makes OTA review health a visibility question and not only a distribution one.
The uncomfortable truth is that you need all three. A property strong in one and thin in another wins some engines and loses others, and each platform reinforces the others in the AI's assessment.
Key takeaway
Reviews decide your visibility inside the booking platforms, and again when AI reads those platforms to compose an answer.
Dominates "things to do in..." queries in AI answers, and Viator reviews aggregate with TripAdvisor's, so the two work as one asset.
Local and Maps grounding for attraction queries, and now the single place travelers most often post experience reviews: 32% of US travelers post on Google against 23% on TripAdvisor.
Arival, Beyond the Stars, 2025
A growing AI citation source, and the marketplace ranking is itself review-driven. GetYourGuide lists review score among its three ranking factors; Viator confirms reviews, ratings and recency shape its sort order.
Amusement parks live in a high-volume game where recency dominates. Museums benefit disproportionately from editorial mentions layered on top of reviews. Tour operators should treat booking-platform reviews as their primary AI evidence, since those pages both rank and get cited.
© ESS Group, Hjortviken Country Club
Case 01
If you see reputation management as administration rather than marketing, you're on very thin ice. What the guest thinks is everything.
Fredrik ToreskogCreative Director / Partner
Key takeaway
No single review has visibly moved an ESS Group property. Sustained shifts in rating, up or down, clearly do.
ESS Group is a Swedish hospitality group running 15 hotel and resort destinations across Sweden, Norway and Denmark. It started in 2007 with Ystad Saltsjöbad on the south coast of Sweden and has grown to include many popular destinations such as Fyri Resort in Hemsedal, Norway, and Jacy'z in Gothenburg, to mention a few. The portfolio is deliberately not built around location convenience: these are places guests travel for, not places they stay near something else. That distinction matters for how they are found, because a destination has to be chosen on its own merits rather than turn up in a list of what is nearby.
ESS Group is not speculating about the change in search behavior. They are watching it arrive in their own reporting.
"All our data says the same thing: behaviors are changing incredibly fast right now. Traditional search as a source is going down, and the AI services are going up. We see it in the data and we see it in the quantitative guest surveys we run."
Fredrik Toreskog
Toreskog is careful not to oversell the break with the past. Ranking well in Google and landing well in an AI answer still have a good deal in common, he notes, "but the way of working and the focus are absolutely changing fast." This is the shift this report opens with, seen from inside a group large enough to measure it: the same signals, read by a different reader.
Not with a tool, and not with a campaign. Toreskog turns the question of uncontrolled platforms around: the platforms report the experience, they do not create it.
"If we can deliver world-class guest experience and hospitality and always create high value-for-money, the guest comes back. If we keep the focus on the actual experience between people, then we can own the reputation."
Fredrik Toreskog
He has a number behind it. When ESS Group asks guests why they chose a particular destination, more than 80% name either a friend's recommendation or a previous stay. For a group whose growth has come from guests returning and telling other people, the review profile is a public record of something they were already managing.
Ownership sits locally. Each destination runs its own review work with routines to match, and a purpose-built dashboard for group-level overview arrives during Q3. Toreskog does not oversell where they are today: "I'll be honest, we can do this much better." What he insists on is where the energy goes. The tooling matters less than "local ownership, and celebrating when you make progress."
On impact he is precise in a way that is worth noting. No single review has visibly moved a property. Sustained shifts in rating, up or down, clearly do. That is the pattern the evidence chapter of this report describes, confirmed at the scale of 15 properties.
Interview conducted in Swedish. Quotes translated and pending approval by ESS Group.
© Arctic Adventures
Case 02
When rates and locations are similar, reviews decide it.
Sergio PancadasGeneral Manager
Key takeaway
One asset, three returns: rate held, better visibility on the OTAs, and trust established before arrival.
The Adventure Hotels are the accommodation side of Arctic Adventures, Iceland's largest adventure tour operator, with more than 40 years in the market. The portfolio runs from Adventure Hotel Geirland near Kirkjubæjarklaustur to Adventure Hotel Hof within sight of Vatnajökull, with further properties in the west and the eastern highlands. The south coast hotels sit directly on the route most international visitors take out of Reykjavík, which puts them in the most crowded comparison set in the country.
AI has entered the planning conversation without yet taking it over. Guests began mentioning ChatGPT during the past year, still well behind Booking.com, Google and travel agents, but growing quickly. What Pancadas notices most is not the volume. It is that the questions have changed shape.
"Guests aren't just searching for a hotel anymore. They're asking AI tools where to stay between attractions, which properties have good reviews, or where to find something authentic."
Sergio Pancadas
For a hotel selling on location and reputation, the consequence is immediate: "these tools lean heavily on public reviews and ratings." A question phrased as "which properties have good reviews" is answered from the review record, not from the website.
By treating the rating as a commercial instrument rather than a scoreboard. South Iceland is one of the country's most competitive hotel markets. Guests choose between dozens of properties inside a small geography, most at comparable rates and equally close to the same sights. When the variables match, the rating is the tie-breaker, and it pays in three places at once.
"Good ratings help us hold our ADR, get better visibility on OTA platforms, and build trust before a guest even arrives."
Sergio Pancadas
Rate, visibility and trust, from one asset. This is the compounding the platform chapter of this report describes, and it is why Adventure Hotel works the OTAs and Google rather than picking one.
Reviews are read for patterns rather than answered one at a time. Language is no longer the obstacle it was, since translation tools now carry context and tone well enough. The harder skill is interpretation.
"A guest rarely writes 'the housekeeping was bad.' More often it's a string of comments about room presentation or bathroom condition that, taken together, point to a real problem."
Sergio Pancadas
Patterns go to managers and department heads and are worked through in monthly management meetings. The clearest result is breakfast. Guests kept returning to the same two points, variety and how food was presented at the buffet. Once it was obvious this was a pattern rather than a bad morning, the hotel reworked the service, and the comments on breakfast improved noticeably afterwards.
Pancadas's advice to peers is refreshingly untechnical: "Focus on guest experience and on positive interactions with hotel staff. People make the difference, especially when the services offered are limited in small countryside hotels."
© Best Arctic
Case 03
Reviews are not just feedback. If we don't get more reviews, we get less visibility, we get fewer tours, we sell less, we earn less.
Carolina PenaMarketing & Brand Manager
Key takeaway
They cannot control what guests write, but they can control the effort to ask. The right moment, and something given back.
Best Arctic is a tourism company based in Tromsø. They run their own experiences, such as northern lights tours, dog sledding and the Arctic Route bus network, linking Tromsø with several destinations within the Nordic region such as Rovaniemi, Narvik, Senja, Lofoten but also between Narvik and Kiruna. Around those they resell more than 200 third-party activities from local suppliers, taking on the marketing, booking and customer service so the operator can concentrate on running the experience. Roughly 19,000 guests booked directly through their website last season, and their guests are heavily international, arriving from across Europe, Asia and the US.
That mix matters for two reasons. A reputation spread across many languages is harder to build and worth more once built. And because most of the portfolio belongs to other operators, part of Best Arctic's reputation is other people's delivery.
Around spring last season, Best Arctic's marketing team noticed organic visibility dropping. It was not because the work had stopped. It was because the way people search had changed.
"People are now searching a lot via the LLMs like Gemini, Perplexity, ChatGPT. We are in a zero-click era where people do all their research without leaving the ChatGPT window."
Carolina Pena
Pena had flagged it before the numbers moved, and says so without triumph: "Our organic visibility dropped. And it didn't drop because we weren't doing our work, or because we're not good enough. It dropped because people are searching differently now."
On two fronts. First they opened an AEO and GEO project to make their content easier for answer engines to read and cite. Work she is careful not to describe as finished: "Whatever works this week will not work next month."
Second, they began treating ratings and reviews as an authority asset rather than an afterthought. Pena launched a dedicated review project, and a named colleague now owns replying to every review, working to a script that covers tone and sets out when a review should be escalated as an operational issue instead of simply answered.
Then they engineered the ask itself, which is the part most operators skip.
"You don't control what people are saying, but you can control the effort you make to ask for that feedback."
Carolina Pena
Guests are handed a QR code that opens a single page of choices: pick a platform to review on, download the tour photos, or open a booklet of discounts at Tromsø bars, restaurants and shops, with notes on what to eat and which souvenirs are actually made in the region. The discounts cost Best Arctic nothing, because the businesses get exposure to a steady stream of visitors in exchange.
"It's not just about asking for reviews. It's finding the right moment, when people are relaxed, and giving something back."
Carolina Pena
Reviews at Best Arctic do not sit in a marketing inbox. In weekly Monday meetings the review owner raises the patterns worth investigating: portion sizes, dietary needs such as gluten intolerance, guide performance.
Pena also took the argument outside the company. At Best Arctic's season kickoff she told the suppliers and partners whose tours they resell to build the same habit: claim the profiles, train the guides to ask, and reply to the good reviews as well as the bad ones.
05
Everything above becomes practical here.
The first 45 days need no new budget, only ownership and a routine.
Key takeaway
Never incentivize or fake reviews. Platforms detect it, penalties are severe, and one exposed fake destroys the trust a hundred real reviews built.
Ask ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity the questions your guests ask: best hotel in your town for families, things to do in your region. Document what they say. Claim and verify every profile, and check that name, contact details, hours and descriptions are identical everywhere. Benchmark three competitors on volume, rating, response rate, speed and recency.
Build one systematic review ask. A single well-timed invitation, at checkout, in the post-visit email, by QR at the exit, beats every clever hack; aim it at the weaker of your top two platforms. Then respond to 100% of reviews from today forward, within 24 to 48 hours, in the guest's language. Refresh your Google and TripAdvisor content: current photos, complete attributes, descriptions that mention what travelers actually ask about.
Set a review velocity target for your size, because a steady weekly inflow beats seasonal bursts. Coach for detail: "the kids loved the husky puppies and the guide switched effortlessly to German" is AI evidence, "great tour" is not. Go multilingual deliberately, and re-run the AI audit monthly. Visibility shifts within weeks, not years.
Key takeaway
If nobody owns these six numbers by name, the work stops the first busy week. Ownership is the whole mechanism.
From day 90 the work becomes a routine rather than a project, and a routine needs a scoreboard. Six numbers are enough.
Review volume. Total, and per platform, so you can see which profile is starving.
Review velocity. New reviews per week. The number that tells you whether the ask is working.
Rating trend. Per platform, on a 90-day rolling basis, not lifetime average.
Response rate. Target 100%, positive reviews included.
Response time. Target under 48 hours. The visible brands sit at 2.1 days.
AI visibility. Monthly spot-checks across the three big engines: do they mention you, and what do they say?
Key takeaway
A long, organic, multilingual, responded-to review history is the one asset in this report that cannot be bought retroactively.
Three developments will raise the stakes further within the next two years. None of them changes the advice; all of them shorten the time available to act on it.
AI assistants are moving from recommending to transacting: searching, comparing and completing bookings on the traveler's behalf. When an agent books, there is no second chance at persuasion and no beautiful website to seduce the guest mid-funnel. The decision runs entirely on machine-readable trust, and reviews are its richest fuel.
As reviews grow more valuable, so do fakes, increasingly AI-generated ones. Platforms are investing heavily in detection and regulators are moving. Businesses with long, organic, multilingual, responded-to review histories will hold an advantage that cannot be bought or faked after the fact.
When the same review signals drive marketplace rankings, classic search, AI answers and soon autonomous booking agents, reputation stops being a marketing activity you do on Fridays. It becomes operational infrastructure: monitored, benchmarked and managed like revenue or occupancy. The businesses treating it that way today are compounding an advantage the invisible 84% will struggle to catch.
We will show you what the three big engines say about your business, and how your review profile compares with the competitors that matter to you.
Book a reputation benchmark at visit.comVISIT is a platform that brings together everything hospitality, experience, and short-term rentals need to be efficient, profitable and make connections that deliver captivating guest experiences.
Your reputation now lives across dozens of platforms, in many languages, read by machines around the clock. The VISIT Reputation Module gives hospitality and experience businesses the overview they are missing.
One of the largest review datasets in the world, aggregated daily from 60+ platforms including Google, TripAdvisor, Booking.com and the major experience marketplaces.
Including Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Finnish, analyzed in the original language, so you understand not just scores but what guests actually say. Topic-level insight identifies hundreds of recurring themes automatically, so you know why a rating moved. All languages that are supported by GPT5.
Response workflows and direct reply integrations to the key Review Channels make responding to reviews a routine rather than a project and supports your way to agentic shortlists.
Take one module, one solution area, or the whole platform.
Segments we cover
Hospitality · Experiences · Destination building · Vacation rental
How the guest finds you
What the guest experiences
What each guest is worth
Why the guest comes back
Founded in Gothenburg 1999 · 400+ people · 10 offices · 10,000+ clients · 150+ countries
One platform, one partner, one experience
Appendix
Written and researched by Erica Broomelius, Head of Marketing & Brands, VISIT. Customer interviews conducted June to September 2026. © VISIT 2026. This report may be shared freely with attribution. visit.com