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 Content Strategist
Crawl comparison is genuinely diagnostic — analyses diff against previous crawls with change filters, log data sits beside crawl data, full Search Console data is imported daily, and Core Web Vitals field data comes from Google's own real-user source with impact-prioritised recommendations on top. We found no public information on JavaScript rendering, structured-data validation, or crawl budget analysis, which holds this below the top band. 2 3 7 9