Representative data
This is what your report looks like.
A representative result for a mid-sized content site, scored 52 out of 100. The data is illustrative, the layout and the reasoning are exactly what you get: a summary, eight pillar findings with their evidence, and the priorities that move your score most.
What does the summary tell you first?
You read the total, then the two weakest pillars. In this sample the site scores 52, in the at-risk band, and schema at 37 and architecture at 42 carry most of the loss. Search at 91 and performance at 88 show the team already does careful work where it can see the result.
This pattern is common: a well-run site on a platform that has aged underneath it. The report says so in one paragraph, before any detail. That is the sentence you carry into your next meeting. The rest is just backup.
How do you read a pillar finding?
Each pillar opens with a finding, the evidence behind it and one recommendation. The evidence is written for a digital director, not a developer. Eleven of fourteen images load lazily. No Content-Security-Policy header. One structured data block fails to parse. And you can check every line against your own pages in a browser.
Where the evidence is thin, the finding says so, and the score stays near the middle. A public read never guesses in your favor or against you (it can't, and it shouldn't). It reports what it can see.
What shape does a 52 have?
Two sites can share a total and carry different risks. Isolate a pillar, or cycle the examples, to see how the shape changes while the number barely moves.
Select or focus a pillar to read this result
Eight pillar findings.
Open for evidence
01Architecture42
The pages render client-side from a bundle of 14 scripts, four of them loaded from third-party hosts. The generator tag names a framework version two major releases behind. That's dated, and it shows.
Priority response
Move the templates to server or static rendering and retire the dependencies that no longer receive updates.
02Performance88
Images declare dimensions, and 11 of 14 load lazily. The homepage HTML is 68 KB. This is the healthy part (and the proof is simple): the first response arrives in under 400 ms.
Priority response
Keep the budget. Add a build check that fails when script weight grows past the current baseline.
03Security71
HTTPS is enforced and Strict-Transport-Security is set. But there is no Content-Security-Policy. X-Frame-Options is missing too, on three of eight sampled pages, and that gap is one you can see for yourself.
Priority response
Ship a Content-Security-Policy in report-only mode first, then enforce it. Apply the frame header site-wide.
04Search91
Every sampled page has a unique title and one H1. Each also carries a description within the length Google displays, plus a self-referencing canonical. So someone here got the basics right.
Priority response
Nothing structural. Review the three pages whose descriptions exceed 155 characters.
05Schema37
Two JSON-LD blocks exist, both on the homepage. Product and article pages carry no structured data at all. And one of the two blocks fails to parse.
Priority response
Fix the parse error, then add Article, Product and BreadcrumbList types generated from the same data the templates use.
06AI readiness63
robots.txt allows GPTBot and ClaudeBot. That's the open door. But inside, passages run long, and headings rarely match the questions readers ask. There is no llms.txt.
Priority response
Rewrite section headings as questions with the answer in the first sentence. Add llms.txt only if you maintain it.
07Editorial experience58
Heading levels skip from H1 to H3 on five pages. Language and viewport are declared. Reading order follows the visual order.
Priority response
Repair the heading hierarchy in the templates so every page reads as an outline.
08Operational health72
Caching headers are consistent, and redirects resolve in one hop. The sampled pages respond within a narrow time band. Two pages, however, return 200 for paths that look retired (a quiet leftover from some earlier cleanup).
Priority response
Return 404 or 410 for retired paths so crawlers stop spending budget on them.
The three priorities.
- 01
Fix the structured data
Repair the parse error and generate Article, Product and BreadcrumbList from the template data. Schema is 10% of your score and the cheapest pillar to move.
- 02
Ship a Content-Security-Policy
Report-only first, then enforce. Add X-Frame-Options site-wide. Security is 12% of the score and the headers take an afternoon.
- 03
Plan the rendering change
Architecture at 42 is the structural problem. Scope server or static rendering and a dependency refresh before the next redesign budget is spent on visuals.
Free automated assessment