LuvKaizen and Kunzum are not really competing for the same brief. LuvKaizen is the larger, broader option; Kunzum is one person doing one thing in one category. If you are choosing between them, the deciding question is whether you need capacity or evidence.
Kunzum wrote this page, so the fair version of LuvKaizen is below in its own words, linked, read on 12 September 2026. The alternatives page covers it at more length and names three other firms.
In short
- LuvKaizen: Crypto and general B2B AEO, built around question mapping, answer blocks and schema. Publishes its price ranges.
- Kunzum: one operator, three clients at a time, crypto only, AI search visibility only.
- LuvKaizen is better at everything requiring a team, breadth or reach.
- Kunzum publishes 1,500 raw AI responses; that is the whole differentiator.
- Neither offers guarantees, and neither should.
Side by side
| LuvKaizen | Kunzum | |
|---|---|---|
| Shape | Crypto and Web3, plus general B2B AEO | One operator, crypto only |
| Capacity | Case studies published for io.finnet, Swissmoney and Gate.io | Three clients at a time |
| Services | AEO, GEO and LLM SEO, question mapping, answer blocks, FAQ and HowTo schema, entity cleanup, snippet tracking | AI search visibility only |
| Pricing | Published: audit and setup $3,000–$10,000 one-off, retainer $5,000–$20,000 a month, three-month programme $20,000–$60,000 | Not published |
| Evidence offered | Case studies | 1,500 raw responses and 12,518 citations, downloadable |
| Guarantees | None offered | None offered |
Choose LuvKaizen if
It publishes its prices. LuvKaizen puts price ranges on the page. Kunzum does not, and that is a point against Kunzum rather than a neutral difference — published pricing respects a buyer's time and filters mismatches before a call.
It says the honest thing about guarantees. Its own FAQ states that nobody can guarantee a ChatGPT recommendation: “No one can: anyone promising that is selling snake oil.” That is the correct answer, and it is worth more than most of what this category publishes.
Longer track record and more capacity. Operating since 2019 with 200+ campaigns stated, against a solo operator with three concurrent clients. For a project that needs volume of output, that difference is real.
Choose Kunzum if
You want the measurement before the invoice. Every claim Kunzum makes about how these engines behave is backed by a corpus you can download and rescore. If you disagree with a conclusion, the disagreement can be settled against the same data.
Your category is crypto and narrow. Stablecoin rails, crypto cards and neobanks, perpetual DEXes are the ones with published measurement behind them.
You want the person writing the pages to be the person reading the results. No account layer, for better and worse.
The honest tie-breaker
If your shortlist has both of these on it, the requirement is probably broader than Kunzum can serve, and LuvKaizen is the safer answer. Kunzum wins a narrow brief: measure what the engines say about our category, change it, prove the change.
For the wider field, five firms are compared on one page, and five questions will qualify any of them faster than a comparison page will.
Sources
- LuvKaizen. LuvKaizen. Checked 2026-09-12.
- Google Search Central, “AI features and your website”. Google. Checked 2026-09-12.
- Aggarwal and colleagues, “GEO: Generative Engine Optimization” (2023). arXiv:2311.09735. Checked 2026-09-12.
Published 2026-09-12. Written by Narender Charan, who runs Kunzum.