Crawling & technical audit
How this is scored
Site crawling at real scale: what the crawler finds, how deeply it checks, whether Core Web Vitals and indexation problems are diagnosed rather than merely listed.
0 — No site crawler; the product is keyword data only.
3 — A crawler with a low page cap that reports broken links and missing tags, with no prioritisation and no rendering of JavaScript.
5 — Scheduled crawls at a stated page limit, JavaScript rendering, issue categories with severity, and Core Web Vitals pulled per template.
8 — Log-file or Search Console integration to compare what the crawler sees against what Google fetched, indexation and canonical diagnosis, structured-data validation, and issues prioritised by traffic impact rather than count.
10 — The audit is diagnostic rather than a list: crawl budget analysed, rendering differences surfaced, regressions detected between crawls with the deploy that caused them inferrable, and remediation guidance specific enough for a developer ticket.
The Technical SEO
Site Audit is a real crawler with the knobs that matter: documented examples of a 10,000-page or 48-hour stop limit, speed settings up to 30,000 URLs per minute, scheduling by day, time and timezone, a JavaScript execution toggle, HTTP-authenticated crawling on Advanced and higher, and PageSpeed Insights flagging low-scoring pages — though through the customer's own Google API key. That clears the mid bar for crawling at scale. I found no public information on log-file or Search Console comparison, indexation or canonical diagnosis, structured-data validation, or issues prioritised by traffic impact rather than count, so the audit reads as a configurable list rather than a diagnosis. 4 12 1