Forty-six percent of institutional investors would rather read a machine's summary of your results than sit through the call. Forty-four percent trust it as much as sell-side research. Brunswick, November 2025, one hundred US institutional investors.

IR teams know their story cold. They tell it on the results call, in the deck, in the annual report. Nobody checks whether it survives on the surfaces the machines actually pull from: the company site, ASX announcements, wire takes, and the terminals the buy-side sits in (Bloomberg, FactSet, Capital IQ, Refinitiv).

When your message is invisible or confused, the machine doesn't wait for you to fix it. It goes and finds its answer on surfaces you don't control. But it looks to you first. That advantage is sitting there unclaimed.

That summary reaches buy-side analysts before you're in the room. If it drifts from your disclosures, the market prices the correction before you know it happened.

We ran the check across the ASX 200. Two points of verbatim variance per company, the IR story against what the machines can actually read. Scored zero to a hundred on how much the gap matters and how easily it closes.

Average score: eighty-four. Fifty-eight companies scored above ninety. Two scored zero because their sites refused every fetch outright. Almost the whole index is telling one story on the call and another, diluted, absent, or contradicted, on the surfaces the machines read.

ASIC has accepted machine-readable filings since 2010. Inline XBRL since 2015. In sixteen years, not a single ASX-listed company has filed one. So the machine does what it's built to do with a hundred-page PDF: cruise by, pull the easiest attributes across the peer set, and leave the investment narrative absent from its findings.

Common themes in what's left behind. A strategy page in vendor boilerplate, "stockholders" inherited from a template built for a New York listing. A meta description still carrying the business the company sold two years ago. A robots.txt file, decided by someone in IT, closing the door on every crawler that would carry the story. An investor site whose "Latest Results" tile is pointing at the half-year before last.

None of it is scandal. It's neglect. All of it is fixable in ninety days: one sentence landed everywhere the company controls, results in HTML beside the PDF, a strategy page in the company's own words instead of a vendor's. Nothing new. Just visibility for the story you're already committed to telling.

We've written this problem three times before: How Models Read Your Brand, The Encode Layer, Brand inside the machine.

We'll run your read for free. A four-page report, sourced and scored, back in your inbox in a week. Email b@planb.works. If it's worth closing, that's a conversation for after.