A 14-day, senior-strategist-led SEO audit covering technical, on-page, E-E-A-T, backlinks, competitive gap, and AI search visibility. Delivered as a prioritized 90-day roadmap your team or another agency can execute, not a 200-page PDF.
Six audit components, one written report, one live executive readout.
Full site crawl covering indexation, canonicalization, robots.txt, XML sitemap health, Core Web Vitals, mobile usability, structured data, and JavaScript rendering issues that block ranking.
Title tags, meta descriptions, heading structure, internal linking depth, content quality, and keyword cannibalization across your highest-value pages and service categories.
Author bios, credentials, citations, review velocity, and brand mention analysis benchmarked against the sites currently ranking in your space.
Referring domain quality, anchor text distribution, toxic link detection, and lost-link recovery, plus a prioritized link-building target list for the next 90 days.
Keyword gap, content gap, and SERP feature ownership analysis against your top three competitors so you know exactly which pages to build, rewrite, or retire next.
How your brand currently surfaces in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews for your target queries, plus the structured-data and content fixes that will get you cited.
Automated reports flag thousands of low-impact issues and miss the few that actually move revenue
Generic checklists don't account for your industry, your competitors, or your local market
No prioritization by revenue impact, so your team doesn't know what to fix first
E-E-A-T and AI search visibility are ignored, even though they now drive a growing share of qualified traffic
Recommendations sit in a PDF instead of becoming a sequenced 90-day execution plan
The audit market is full of automated exports. A tool crawls your site, flags four hundred issues sorted by its own severity scale, and the report lands as a PDF nobody acts on because it cannot tell you which three of those four hundred items are actually costing you money. A useful audit does the opposite: it is short, it is ranked by revenue impact, and every item is specified well enough for a developer to implement without a follow up meeting.
This is the right purchase when you suspect something is wrong but cannot name it. Traffic slid and nobody knows why. A migration went live and rankings did not recover. An agency relationship ended and you want an independent read before hiring the next one. In each case you are buying a diagnosis, not a retainer, and you should be able to hand the output to any competent team.
It also works as a pre purchase check. Buyers of service businesses, private equity operators and boards increasingly want to know whether the acquired company's inbound pipeline is durable or propped up by tactics that will not survive the next algorithm update. That analysis looks different from a marketing audit and we scope it differently.
A full audit runs two to three weeks depending on site size. The output is a prioritized action list, a walkthrough call, and the raw data behind every finding.
Full crawl, log file review where server logs are available, search console export across the full retention window, analytics, and current ranking data. Log files matter more than most people expect, because they show what crawlers actually did rather than what a tool assumes they did.
We separate the site into problems of crawl, index, quality, relevance and authority, because the remedy differs entirely by category. A page that is not indexed and a page that is indexed but ranked poorly look identical in a traffic report and share no solution.
We take the terms that matter commercially and examine what the pages currently beating you are doing: depth, structure, freshness, internal support and external citation. This converts vague advice into a specific bar to clear.
Findings are ranked by estimated revenue impact against implementation effort, written as tickets with acceptance criteria, and walked through live so your team can challenge the reasoning rather than receive a document.
An audit does not generate traffic. It generates decisions. These are the checks we would apply to our own work.
Every item should name the affected URLs, the specific change, and what correct looks like after deployment. If a finding needs a follow up call to be actionable, it was not finished.
Each priority item should connect to inquiries through a stated chain: this template change affects these pages, which serve these queries, which produce this share of inbound. Findings that cannot make that connection belong in an appendix.
The first observable proof. Once technical items ship, the share of important URLs indexed should move within two to four weeks, well before ranking changes appear.
We identify specific URLs we expect to move and by roughly when. Being held to that prediction is uncomfortable and it is the correct standard.
The obvious follow through when findings point to relevance and depth rather than technical debt.
When the audit concludes the platform itself is the constraint, a rebuild beats years of patches.
A wider diagnostic covering paid, conversion and lifecycle alongside search.
Two to three weeks for most sites. Very large or heavily programmatic sites take longer because sampling is not sufficient to reach reliable conclusions.
Search Console, analytics, and read access to the site. Server logs and CMS access improve the analysis significantly but are not strictly required.
We can, and we are equally happy handing the document to your team or another agency. The audit is written to be usable by anyone competent.
Almost always. Independent review is most of the value, and we are candid when the existing work is good and the problem lies elsewhere.
Then we say so and point at where the actual constraint sits, which is frequently conversion or sales follow up rather than search. That is a useful finding, not a failed engagement.