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
The crawler is the real thing: JavaScript rendering (off by default but supported), unlimited include/exclude rules with regex and AND/OR logic, automatic detection of canonical chains and duplicates with internal PageRank, and indexation diagnosis down to robots.txt directives with line numbers and meta robots content, with Search Console and Google Analytics data joined to crawl results. It stops short of the diagnostic tier because we found no public information on Core Web Vitals per template, log-file analysis, crawl budget, or issues prioritised by traffic impact rather than count; the nearest thing to regression work is an export option pairing current with previous check data. 1 2 3 6 9