SEO Audit Services
Look beneath the surface.
Find the issues worth investigating, understand the evidence, and give your team a practical order of work. We review your website in the context of your business, then turn the findings into a focused action plan.
Evidence. Priorities. Next steps.
An SEO audit investigates how your website supports organic discovery. It combines technical checks, page-level review, and the available performance data to identify issues, test assumptions, and recommend useful next steps.
The value is in the interpretation: which pages matter, whether the finding is valid, and what your team should do with it.
Illustrative review sample — not client data or a scan of your site.
Choose a viewA tool can surface a potential issue. The next step is to check whether it is valid and relevant to the page.
12 example flags · 4 + 5 + 3 = 12
An audit identifies and prioritizes work. Implementing changes and reviewing their effects are separate steps unless included in the agreed scope.
Choose a starting point to see how the focus can change. These examples help frame the discussion; they do not diagnose your website.
We start with what changed, when it changed, and which pages or search segments are involved. Website changes, measurement issues, and shifts in demand all need context before a cause is assigned.
Review focusWhich pages changed?
What else happened in this period?
Timing is a clue, not proof of cause
We agree on the pages, templates, markets, and data sources in scope. The review then connects the findings across these four areas instead of treating every tool warning as an isolated task.
Review whether important public pages can be reached and whether their technical signals match the intended search behavior. Findings are checked against the purpose of the page before a change is recommended.
Examine how people and search engines move through the site, and whether key pages have a clear role. We look for structural patterns, weak connections, and areas where multiple pages compete for the same purpose.
Review whether the selected pages explain the offer, address relevant questions, and provide useful supporting information. Recommendations consider the audience and the job each page needs to do.
Review representative page experiences and the available measurement setup. We distinguish observed usability or performance issues from assumptions about their business effect.
Specialist reviews—such as detailed international SEO, backlink investigations, log analysis, or migration planning—are scoped separately when relevant.
A useful audit explains the observation, the evidence, and the next action. Follow a fictional example to see how a raw finding becomes a task your team can review.
The review identifies an indexing instruction on a page that appears to describe a public service. That observation needs context before it becomes a recommendation.
Priority depends on what is affected, how certain the finding is, and what the work requires. We separate an urgent blocker from an opportunity that still needs investigation.
Illustrative priorities — actual recommendations depend on the review.
An important service page is unintentionally excluded. The problem is verified and the correction can be scoped.
Validate the exclusion setting, correct it, then verify that the page is accessible.
A deliberate exclusion, an outdated page, and an important service page call for different decisions. The audit needs your business context: which pages matter, what has changed, and what your team is trying to achieve.
The deliverables should make decisions and handoffs easier. We agree on the depth of the report and the implementation support before the engagement starts.
A concise explanation of the main findings, why they matter to the business, and the decisions needed next.
Documented examples, affected page groups where known, the evidence reviewed, and a clear distinction between confirmed findings and open questions.
<meta name="robots"
content="noindex, follow">01 Recommended actions, suggested ownership, relevant dependencies, and verification criteria for the agreed work.
Developer · after approval
Check: page permits indexingEditor · after brief sign-off
Check: agreed content gaps coveredAnalyst · gather page-level context
Check: cause supported by evidenceIllustrative roles and checks · ownership agreed with your team.
A walkthrough can be included to discuss the findings with your team. Implementation and follow-up verification are included only where agreed.
A compact process keeps diagnosis, implementation, and verification clear from the beginning.
Define the business questions, page groups, markets, and access available. Agree on what the audit includes and what it leaves out.
Combine the agreed checks with manual review of representative pages and available data. Record limitations and unresolved questions.
Connect observations to page purpose and business importance. Separate confirmed tasks from recommendations that need further validation.
Present the findings in a usable format and clarify the next actions, ownership, and any agreed follow-up.
The requirements depend on scope. Public pages allow an external review, while read-only access to relevant search and analytics data can support a more informed assessment. Recent change notes and a list of important services or products provide useful context. If access is unavailable, the report should state what could not be verified.
The scope is agreed around your website and business questions. It can cover crawl access, indexability, structure, content, representative user journeys, and available measurement data. Specialist areas are defined separately when relevant.
Tools can surface patterns and potential issues. An audit adds validation, business context, and a reasoned order of work. The deliverable should explain what was found and what your team should do with it.
Only if implementation is included in the agreed scope. The audit itself investigates and recommends. We make the boundary between diagnosis, changes, and follow-up checks explicit before the work starts.
It can help investigate the timing, affected pages, and available evidence. A decline can have several contributing factors, so the report should distinguish supported findings from hypotheses that need more information.
Relevant read-only access can improve the review, but requirements depend on scope. If the assessment is limited to public pages, we state the resulting limitations rather than pretending to know what the missing data would show.
The size of the site, the number of templates, the depth of review, and the availability of data affect the schedule. We agree on delivery milestones after defining those factors.
No. An audit provides findings and recommendations; it does not control search results. Even after implementation, outcomes depend on multiple factors and need to be assessed over time.
Pricing depends on the agreed coverage, complexity, evidence review, and handoff requirements. We define the work before proposing a fee, rather than treating every website as the same project.
Share your website and the question behind the audit. We’ll use that context to discuss a useful scope and a practical starting point.
