Dmytro Hrysiuk — Generative Engine Optimization strategist, Toronto

The name is shared with other people, and search engines have historically had trouble telling us apart. So, plainly: this Dmytro Hrysiuk is the founder of LumiRank, a Generative Engine Optimization and search visibility studio based in Toronto, Ontario. The work is SEO and GEO for businesses across the Greater Toronto Area and the rest of Canada.

The only professional profile that belongs to me is the LinkedIn page linked below. Anything else carrying this name and claiming to be this business is someone else, and the entity work on this site exists partly so that assistants stop merging us.

The five search and AI disciplines, executed hands-on rather than subcontracted: Generative Engine Optimization, entity and knowledge architecture, semantic authority, technical SEO, and LLM visibility monitoring. The first two decide whether anything else can work. A site the engines cannot fully read, or an identity they cannot resolve, caps everything built on top of it.

Where LumiRank sets strategy for a channel without running it — paid media, digital PR, social — the site labels it that way. That distinction costs some breadth in the pitch. It is worth more than the alternative, which is claiming delivery that is not happening and being found out in month two.

The client work published on this site covers a renovation contractor in the GTA, an interior design studio working across Toronto and Los Angeles, a consumer app defining a category that did not have a name, and a same-day appliance repair service. Four businesses with very little in common, which is roughly the point: the mechanics of being resolvable and quotable do not change much by sector.

Measure first. Every engagement opens with a prompt panel of forty to sixty real buyer questions, run across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity and Google’s AI surfaces, recording whether the brand is named, how it is described, and who gets named instead. That baseline is what every later claim gets measured against. Without it, an agency reporting improvement is unfalsifiable.

Then fixes in a fixed order, because the order is not arbitrary. Crawler access and rendering first, since roughly three quarters of sites are excluded from AI citation by access barriers alone and no content strategy survives that. Entity resolution second. Passage-level content third. Corroboration last and continuously, because it is the slowest signal to move and the hardest for a competitor to copy.

Reporting keeps Search Console and the prompt panel in separate columns. A gain in classical rankings is not a gain in AI visibility, and the blended visibility score exists mainly so that it can always be going up.

No guaranteed rankings, and no guarantee that a given model will recommend you. The engines do not publish their selection logic, they change it without notice, and the same prompt can return different answers on the same afternoon. Anyone promising a specific position inside ChatGPT is describing something they cannot control.

No invented numbers. The case studies here carry only figures a client’s own Search Console can confirm, and where no verified metric exists they use a truthful non-numeric headline instead of a placeholder. No fabricated reviews or ratings, ever, and no marking up a client’s Google rating as though it were ours.

No schema-as-citation-lever pitch. Ahrefs’ controlled test found AI Overview citations declined after schema was added, and a controlled enterprise-retrieval study found JSON-LD barely moved accuracy. Structured data does real work in disambiguation. It is not the citation mechanism it gets sold as, and the published tests point the other way.

Pricing is on the site rather than behind a call. Retainers run $299 to $1,999 CAD a month, with custom scoping above that.

LumiRank is based in Toronto and works with clients across the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario and the rest of Canada. The work is remote by default. Search visibility does not require anyone to be in the same room, and pretending otherwise is how agencies justify a premium for proximity that changes nothing about the result.

Every engagement opens the same way, with an audit. You get the prompt panel showing which engines name you today and what they say, plus the entity findings: every place your business is described on the open web and every contradiction between those descriptions. That document is yours whether or not the engagement continues.

The reason it works that way is that the audit is also how I find out whether I can help. Some businesses turn out to have a crawler-access problem worth an afternoon rather than a retainer, and it is better for both of us if that surfaces in week one. A few have no external footprint at all, in which case the honest advice is to go and create something worth citing before paying anyone to engineer citations of it.

If you want to see the reasoning behind any of this before talking to anyone, the journal is where it is worked out in public, and the pricing is on the site rather than behind a discovery call.