Free tool
Enter a URL. We fetch the page and run around 25 checks on its HTML, and every result names the element it found, so you can see what to change.
What it reads
Three questions a search engine or an AI assistant asks of a page before it will send anyone to it.
Indexability, HTTPS, canonical URL, robots.txt and whether an XML sitemap is reachable or declared.
Title and meta description length, a single clear H1, subheading structure, declared language and JSON-LD structured data.
Mobile viewport, image alt coverage, Open Graph tags, content length and how fast the server returns the document.
Method
Each check carries a weight based on how much it actually matters — being indexable is weighted three times as heavily as a declared language, because a noindex tag removes the page from search entirely while a missing lang attribute does not. The score is the share of that total weight you earned, with a warning counting as half credit. The full report lists every check, its weight, its verdict and the value we measured, so you can add the number up yourself.
This audits one URL from its server-rendered HTML. It does not crawl your whole site, does not run JavaScript, and does not measure Core Web Vitals from real users — a page built entirely in the browser will read as thin here while looking complete to a visitor. It also cannot see anything that needs access to your accounts, such as Search Console impressions, backlink profiles or competitor gaps.
A full audit covering the whole site, your Search Console data and the competitors you actually lose to is work we do with clients.
FAQ
A free SEO audit tool fetches a page and inspects the signals search engines read before ranking it. This one checks whether the page is indexable and served over HTTPS, the length and presence of the title and meta description, heading structure, canonical URL, mobile viewport, declared language, Open Graph tags, JSON-LD structured data, image alt coverage, content length, robots.txt and XML sitemap availability, and how quickly the server returns the document.
No, and no on-page score from any tool is directly comparable to another. Every tool picks its own checks and its own weights, so two audits of the same page routinely disagree. This one publishes its full rubric, listing each check, its weight and the measured value, so the number can be reproduced and argued with rather than taken on trust.
On-page hygiene and ranking are related but far from the same thing. A page with strong backlinks, established topical authority and a well-matched search intent can outrank a technically cleaner competitor. Treat a low score as a list of unforced errors worth fixing rather than as a prediction of where the page will rank.
No, it audits the single URL you enter, read from that page’s server-rendered HTML. Site-wide problems such as duplicate templates, orphaned pages, internal linking gaps and crawl budget waste need a full crawl of every URL. Running this on your most important few pages is a useful starting point, not a substitute for a site-wide audit.
The word count is taken from the HTML the server returns, before any JavaScript runs. If your page builds its content in the browser, a crawler that does not execute JavaScript sees roughly what this tool saw. That gap is itself worth knowing, because it is how the page can look complete to you and nearly empty to a bot.
Not for the score. The overall result, the pass, warning and failure counts and your top issues are shown immediately with no signup. Only the full report, which lists every individual check with its weight, measured value and fix guidance, asks for an email address.
What happens next
Free, no obligation. Your answers save as you go, so you can stop and pick up where you left off.
