We typed the same questions your next client is typing into ChatGPT and Google right now. These are the actual results. No scoring rubrics, no grading systems. Just: here's what comes back.
We searched five queries your prospects actually ask. Cubeish was not mentioned in any of them. Innovito appeared in three. Appsinnovate appeared in two.
Five searches. The kind of queries a procurement officer at an NGO or a training director at a bank would actually type. Here's what we got.
Cubeish: Not mentioned. Not once. Not on Google, not in AI summaries, not in listicles.
Who showed up instead? Innovito (multiple results, plus they built a whole page just for "eLearning Egypt"), Appsinnovate (shows up with 20+ named clients), Edstellar, Swift eLearning.
Edstellar published a "top 10 corporate training companies in Egypt for 2026" list. Cubeish isn't on it. Innovito is. And the reason is simple: Innovito wrote a 1,400-word landing page targeting that exact keyword.
Cubeish: Not mentioned. UAE-based companies dominate the results.
The names that come back: Human Logic, XpertLearning, Capytech, Thinkdom, Knowledge Horizon.
Look at Thinkdom's homepage: "1,100+ learning projects for 1,000,000+ learners." One line. That's all it takes to become citable. Cubeish's homepage doesn't have a single number on it.
Cubeish: Not mentioned.
The results credit UNICEF, Microsoft, and Cambridge University. The studio that actually built it? Not named.
Think about that. Cubeish's single most impressive project, and UNICEF's own press releases don't mention them. The credential lives in your head, not on the internet. And if it's not on the internet, it doesn't exist for AI.
Cubeish does show up here. But only cubeish.co itself and a couple of ZoomInfo profiles.
No press coverage. No Clutch reviews. No G2 listing. Nothing on any industry directory. Every single page that mentions Cubeish is a page Cubeish owns. And AI engines treat that the same way you'd treat someone who only has self-written LinkedIn recommendations.
Cubeish: Not mentioned.
But here's the interesting part. The results are mostly Yellow Pages directories and student-focused apps. Not a single eLearning production studio shows up. Not Innovito. Not Appsinnovate. Nobody.
In English, this space is competitive. In Arabic? It's completely empty. Nobody's even trying.
0 out of 5. That's how many of these searches return Cubeish. Innovito shows up in 3. Appsinnovate in 2. And it's not because they do better work. Innovito just has more words on the internet. Their homepage alone has ~3,000 words. Cubeish's entire website has 449.
We went to their websites. Not to compare features. Just to see what they're putting out there that Cubeish isn't.
Their homepage: ~3,000 words. (Cubeish: 449.) They also have separate pages for case studies, products, and a page just for "eLearning Egypt."
Case studies: Six published, each with its own URL. HIKMA Pharma, UNICEF LSCE, UNMAS Syria, WIPO. Real pages a search engine can find and an AI can quote.
Client logos: UNFPA, USAID, WFP, UNICEF, WIPO, Hikma, MTC. But notice: they use the names, not just the images.
The move that matters: They built a 1,400-word landing page just for the keyword "eLearning Egypt." That one page is the reason they show up in search and Cubeish doesn't.
Their claim: "10+ years of award-winning, AI-powered digital learning." Bold? Sure. But it's citable text, and AI picks it up.
Client list: They name 20+ clients. Saudi Aramco, Orange, VISA, Nestlé, Vodafone, Egyptian Banking Institute, Roche, Deutsche GIZ. Names as text, not just logos. That difference matters for AI.
Stats on their site: "80% increase in training completion rates." "60% improvement in knowledge retention." Are these verified? Who knows. But they're written down, so ChatGPT repeats them.
Backing: Naseej (big MENA digital transformation company) bought a majority stake in 2023. That kind of backing shows up in searches.
Positioning: Gamification + AR/VR. They picked a lane and they own it.
| Cubeish | Innovito | Appsinnovate | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Homepage word count | 449 | ~3,000 | ~1,500 |
| Published case studies | 0 | 6+ | 1 (testimonial) |
| Named clients (as text) | 0 (logos only) | 8+ | 20+ |
| Blog / articles | None | Active | Blog exists |
| SEO landing pages | 0 | "eLearning Egypt" | Service pages |
| Social media links on site | 0 | All platforms | All platforms |
| LinkedIn company page | Exists, minimal | Active | Active |
| Third-party listings | None | Multiple | Multiple |
| Quantified claims | None | "10+ years" | "80% completion lift" |
| AI search visibility | 0/5 queries | 3/5 queries | 2/5 queries |
Neither of these companies is better at building eLearning than Cubeish. But they're way better at being findable. Innovito wrote one page and owns a search query. Appsinnovate threw a stat on their homepage and now ChatGPT repeats it to prospects. It's not about quality. It's about having something written down that AI can read and repeat.
Cubeish has built for UNICEF, Microsoft, Samsung, ADNOC, PwC Academy. So how much of that can someone actually find online?
Every single one of these exists only as an unnamed logo in a scrollable "Clients" strip. No case study pages. No project descriptions. No results, no outcomes, no story.
Meanwhile, Innovito has a published case study for HIKMA Pharma with its own URL. And one for UNICEF LSCE. And UNMAS Syria. And WIPO. Each one is a page Google can index and ChatGPT can quote.
Someone at a ministry or an NGO asks ChatGPT "who built UNICEF's eLearning in Egypt?" The answer says Microsoft and Cambridge. Cubeish built the thing, and Cubeish isn't even mentioned. That's not a branding problem. That's a deal you didn't get called about because the prospect already found Innovito first.
Honestly, this is the finding we didn't expect.
We searched "أفضل شركات التعليم الإلكتروني في مصر" (best eLearning companies in Egypt) in Arabic.
Results returned: Yellow Pages directories, generic platform companies, and student-focused apps. Not a single specialized eLearning production studio appeared.
No Innovito. No Appsinnovate. No Cubeish. No one.
In English, this query is competitive. In Arabic, it's completely empty.
Cubeish is bilingual. The competitors aren't publishing in Arabic at all.
And think about who searches in Arabic first: government ministries, public training institutions, national development programs. The big-ticket contracts. Those procurement teams aren't starting their search in English.
Ten Arabic articles targeting "تطوير التعليم الإلكتروني للمؤسسات" and "حلول التدريب الرقمي في مصر" would make Cubeish the only eLearning studio in the entire Arabic search conversation.
Right now nobody has even started. That's rare.
In English, you're competing with Innovito's 3,000 words and Appsinnovate's 20 client logos. In Arabic, you'd be competing with literally nothing. Cubeish has the language, the cultural context, the government credentials (PAT, GACA). Ten blog posts would give you more Arabic AI visibility than every competitor combined. That's not an exaggeration.
Cubeish has worked with UNICEF, Microsoft, Samsung. Innovito and Appsinnovate haven't. But nobody searching online would ever know that because those credentials live as unnamed logos on a 449-word site.
Innovito shows up in 3x more AI searches. Not because of better work, just more content. One landing page. That's what it took for them to own "eLearning Egypt."
Arabic eLearning search is empty. Not "competitive" empty. Actually empty. Nobody's publishing there. And Cubeish, with native Arabic and real Egyptian government work, could own that space with a few blog posts.
You don't have a quality problem.
You have a volume problem. And that's the easiest kind to fix.