Scanned sites / charlesmoll.com

SEO report for charlesmoll.com DR 29

The latest Site Spider scan of charlesmoll.com, with 1 scan on record. Each scan is at its own address, for example /domain/charlesmoll-com/2026-09-12-2317.

DR is Ahrefs Domain Rating (0-100, backlink strength), used under its Domain Rating License.

Latest scan

Scanned 2026-09-12 23:17:04 UTC, finished 2026-09-12 23:27:26 UTC. Found on page 3 of brave web search results

Site: https://charlesmoll.com/

Download SQLite databaseEvery page and asset from this scan, with the crawl events, in one file.

88/ 100Good

On September 12, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 246 pages and 263 assets of charlesmoll.com, starting from https://charlesmoll.com/. It scored 88 out of 100, a good result. 9 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by meta descriptions (95), heavy assets (5), title tags (57); 10 checks passed. Most of the points went to meta descriptions (−3.1), heavy assets (−3), title tags (−2.3). 8 checks found something the score does not count, listed as noted. 10 checks were not run because the crawl fetched nothing for them. The list below shows each check's result, the fix plan, when present, explains what to do first, and the security review at the end of the page covers headers, transport, libraries and exposed files.

Security review: Medium3 medium, 2 low and 1 info findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
246
Assets fetched
263
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
9 of 27
CoverageComplete crawl

509 of 511 discovered URLs were fetched. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 300 link destinations on other sites were checked, 85 left unchecked.

  • Title tags57 issues
    57 of 138 pages have title issues. 105 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −2.3 points
  • Meta descriptions95 issues
    95 of 138 pages have meta description issues. 105 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −3.1 points
  • Headings56 issues
    56 of 138 pages have heading issues. 105 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −1.4 points
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sites11 issues
    11 destinations answered with an error, 97 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), 85 were left unchecked by the per-scan cap, of 300 destinations checked.
    −1.8 points
  • Redirects3 issues
    4 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
  • Non-200 responses4 noted
    4 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 3 of them are pages, 0 with an error status; the rest are assets or redirects.
  • Rate limitedOK
    The site did not rate limit the crawler.
  • IndexabilityOK
    0 of 138 indexable pages have indexability warnings. 105 pages noindex by design.
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 16 image references have no alt attribute.
  • Heavy assets5 issues
    5 assets larger than 500 KB among 263 fetched assets.
    −3 points
  • Orphan pages5 issues
    5 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
    −0.1 points
  • Sitemap coverage19 issues
    5 sitemaps listing 129 URLs: 11 crawled pages missing, 1 listed URL broken or redirecting, 7 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −0.5 points
  • Internal link counts112 noted
    Internal link counts for 243 pages; 112 worth a look.
  • Thin content1 issue
    1 of 138 pages have fewer than 200 words. 105 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL formatOK
    All 246 page URLs are plain lowercase addresses without parameters.
  • Canonicals105 noted
    105 of 243 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives243 noted
    243 pages carry a robots directive; 0 carry none.
  • Anchor text45 noted
    45 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure91 noted
    91 of 138 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 105 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Image weight and alt length3 noted
    3 images over 100 KB; 0 with alt text over 100 characters.
  • Response anomaliesOK
    No redirect loops, header redirects or pages served as something other than HTML.
  • HTML and head validationNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.
  • hreflangNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.
  • Structured dataNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.
  • Near duplicatesNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.
  • Soft 404sOK
    None of 243 pages answering 200 reads like an error page.
  • AccessibilityNot checked
    Not checked: the accessibility audit runs in the browser. Tick "Include JavaScript rendering checks" when you request a scan to run it.
  • Link positionsNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before link positions were recorded. Scan the site again to run it.
  • PaginationNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.
  • Headers and cookiesOK
    0 cookies set by the site; 12 response headers recorded across 509 URLs.
  • Orphans in searchNot checked
    Not checked: import a Search Console Pages export on the scan page to find pages Google shows that the site does not link to.
  • Link ScoreOK
    Link Score (internal PageRank, 0-100) for 243 pages; 141 hold almost none (10 or less).
  • JavaScript renderingNot checked
    Not checked: this scan did not render pages. Tick "Include JavaScript rendering checks" when you request a scan to compare the served HTML with what a browser builds.
  • PageSpeed Insights5 noted
    Mobile performance 54 on average across 5 pages; 5 below Google's good thresholds.
  • SpellingNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.

Where this site sits among all scanned sites

2873 sites, median 80%, average 79%

charlesmoll.com scores 88%, higher than 80% of the 2873 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0751500%: 0 sites1%: 0 sites2%: 0 sites3%: 0 sites4%: 0 sites5%: 0 sites6%: 0 sites7%: 0 sites8%: 0 sites9%: 1 site10%: 0 sites11%: 0 sites12%: 0 sites13%: 0 sites14%: 1 site15%: 0 sites16%: 0 sites17%: 0 sites18%: 0 sites19%: 0 sites20%: 0 sites21%: 1 site22%: 0 sites23%: 0 sites24%: 0 sites25%: 0 sites26%: 0 sites27%: 0 sites28%: 1 site29%: 0 sites30%: 0 sites31%: 0 sites32%: 0 sites33%: 0 sites34%: 0 sites35%: 2 sites36%: 1 site37%: 1 site38%: 3 sites39%: 2 sites40%: 3 sites41%: 1 site42%: 2 sites43%: 3 sites44%: 2 sites45%: 6 sites46%: 5 sites47%: 5 sites48%: 6 sites49%: 8 sites50%: 6 sites51%: 7 sites52%: 8 sites53%: 9 sites54%: 9 sites55%: 9 sites56%: 8 sites57%: 17 sites58%: 18 sites59%: 10 sites60%: 15 sites61%: 13 sites62%: 20 sites63%: 29 sites64%: 22 sites65%: 33 sites66%: 43 sites67%: 43 sites68%: 42 sites69%: 52 sites70%: 46 sites71%: 80 sites72%: 76 sites73%: 81 sites74%: 82 sites75%: 87 sites76%: 95 sites77%: 109 sites78%: 132 sites79%: 111 sites80%: 128 sites81%: 125 sites82%: 132 sites83%: 119 sites84%: 130 sites85%: 106 sites86%: 95 sites87%: 96 sites88%: 80 sites89%: 75 sites90%: 55 sites91%: 59 sites92%: 43 sites93%: 29 sites94%: 25 sites95%: 15 sites96%: 18 sites97%: 16 sites98%: 8 sites99%: 3 sites100%: 150 sites88% here100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%

Green 90% and up (Excellent), lime 75 to 89 (Good), amber 50 to 74 (Needs work), red below 50 (Poor).

Internal link map

Loading the link map...

Start page (centre)OKRedirectErrorOrphanLinked from most pagesOne inbound link or noneRings = clicks from the start page. Size = inbound links. Drag to pan, scroll to zoom, click a page to see only its links.

Fix plan

Written by gpt-4o-mini from the scan findings

Written from an earlier version of the analysis. The findings on this page have been recomputed since, so counts and labels here may differ from what the plan describes. The advice still points at the same checks.

The site has some SEO issues that need addressing, including redirecting URLs and issues with titles, meta descriptions, and headings. Prioritize these fixes for improved performance.

  1. 1

    Fix Redirecting URLs

    Why: 4 URLs redirect, impacting user experience and crawl efficiency.

    How: Update the links to point directly to their final destinations or remove unnecessary redirects.

    Checks: redirects

  2. 2

    Resolve Non-200 Responses

    Why: 4 URLs are not returning 2xx responses, which may affect accessibility.

    How: Identify these URLs and return appropriate 200 status responses or update their links.

    Checks: status-codes

  3. 3

    Optimize Title Tags

    Why: 56 pages have title issues which may hinder search rankings.

    How: Revise the titles to be under 60 characters and ensure they are relevant to page content.

    Checks: titles

  4. 4

    Improve Meta Descriptions

    Why: 52 pages have meta description issues, impacting CTR.

    How: Rewrite the meta descriptions to be concise (under 160 characters) and compelling.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  5. 5

    Correct Heading Structure

    Why: 56 pages have heading issues that can confuse search engines.

    How: Ensure each page has a single H1 tag and a logical heading hierarchy.

    Checks: headings

  6. 6

    Enhance Sitemap Coverage

    Why: 11 pages are missing from the sitemap and 1 URL is broken.

    How: Update the sitemap to include all accessible pages and remove broken links.

    Checks: sitemap-coverage

Generated automatically; verify each change against your own site before relying on it.

Security review

Written by gpt-4o-mini from 16 checks over the crawl

The website has several critical security headers missing, exposing it to risks like interception and clickjacking. Implementing proper security headers will help protect users and data integrity.

  • 0 high
  • 3 medium
  • 2 low
  • 1 info
  1. 1

    Missing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)Medium

    Why it matters: Without HSTS, users can be intercepted when accessing the site without HTTPS.

    Fix: Add the header 'Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains'.

    Evidence: HTTP Strict Transport Security

  2. 2

    Missing Content Security Policy (CSP)Medium

    Why it matters: Lack of CSP allows scripts and resources to load from any source, increasing risk of XSS.

    Fix: Add the header 'Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self';'.

    Evidence: Content Security Policy

  3. 3

    Missing X-Frame-Options HeaderMedium

    Why it matters: Absence of this header allows clickjacking attacks by embedding pages in frames.

    Fix: Add the header 'X-Frame-Options: DENY'.

    Evidence: Clickjacking protection

  4. 4

    Missing X-Content-Type-Options HeaderLow

    Why it matters: Without this header, the browser may incorrectly handle file types.

    Fix: Add the header 'X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff'.

    Evidence: MIME sniffing protection

  5. 5

    Third-party Scripts Without Integrity ChecksLow

    Why it matters: Running scripts from external domains without integrity checks increases vulnerability.

    Fix: Implement Subresource Integrity (SRI) for third-party scripts or use CSP to restrict sources.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

  6. 6

    Sensitive Paths in robots.txtInfo

    Why it matters: The robots.txt file lists private paths that should be protected, exposing potential entry points.

    Fix: Implement access control for the listed paths to ensure they are not publicly accessible.

    Evidence: Sensitive paths in robots.txt

What the checks found

  • FoundHTTP Strict Transport SecurityMedium

    No HTML page sends strict-transport-security. Without it a visitor who types the address without https:// can be intercepted on the first request.

    • https://charlesmoll.com/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/contact/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/investment/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/about/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/portfolio/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/charles-moll-photography-reviews/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/how-to-plan-a-wedding-in-montana/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/montana-wedding-venues/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/blog/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/the-best-wedding-venues-in-bozeman/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/helena-wedding-venues/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://charlesmoll.com/big-sky-wedding-venues/ → no strict-transport-security
  • FoundContent Security PolicyMedium

    None of the 243 HTML pages send a Content-Security-Policy header or meta tag, so the browser has no restriction on where scripts, styles and frames may load from.

    • https://charlesmoll.com/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/contact/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/investment/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/about/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/portfolio/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/charles-moll-photography-reviews/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/how-to-plan-a-wedding-in-montana/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/montana-wedding-venues/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/blog/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/the-best-wedding-venues-in-bozeman/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/helena-wedding-venues/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://charlesmoll.com/big-sky-wedding-venues/ → no content-security-policy
  • FoundClickjacking protectionMedium

    No HTML page sends x-frame-options. Without X-Frame-Options (or a CSP frame-ancestors directive) the pages can be embedded in a frame on another site and overlaid with invisible controls.

    • https://charlesmoll.com/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/contact/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/investment/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/about/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/portfolio/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/charles-moll-photography-reviews/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/how-to-plan-a-wedding-in-montana/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/montana-wedding-venues/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/blog/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/the-best-wedding-venues-in-bozeman/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/helena-wedding-venues/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/big-sky-wedding-venues/ → no x-frame-options
  • FoundMIME sniffing protectionLow

    No HTML page sends x-content-type-options. Without X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff a browser may run a file as a script because of its contents rather than its declared type.

    • https://charlesmoll.com/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/contact/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/investment/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/about/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/portfolio/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/charles-moll-photography-reviews/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/how-to-plan-a-wedding-in-montana/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/montana-wedding-venues/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/blog/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/the-best-wedding-venues-in-bozeman/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/helena-wedding-venues/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://charlesmoll.com/big-sky-wedding-venues/ → no x-content-type-options
  • NoteThird-party scripts

    Scripts run from 2 other domains without Subresource Integrity, so a compromise of any of them changes what runs on this site. (Tag managers and analytics rarely support SRI; a Content-Security-Policy that names these hosts is the usual control.)

    • www.googletagmanager.com (40 script tags)
    • tally.so (40 script tags)
  • NoteSensitive paths in robots.txt

    robots.txt lists 1 path that look private. robots.txt is public and does not restrict access, so it doubles as a map for anyone probing the site; those paths need real access control.

    • Disallow: /wp-admin/
6 checks passed, 4 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 243 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKSoftware version disclosure

    The Server header names a product without a version, and there is no X-Powered-By header.

  • OKMixed content

    No HTTPS page loads a script, stylesheet, font or image over plain HTTP.

  • OKForms over HTTPS

    24 forms found, all on HTTPS pages posting to HTTPS addresses.

  • OKKeys and secrets in page code

    No API keys, tokens or private keys were found in the sampled HTML and scripts.

  • OKExposed files and listings

    None of the crawled URLs is a configuration file, backup, dump, repository folder or directory listing.

  • Not applicableReferrer policy

    This scan predates the crawler recording the headers this check needs. Rescan the site to check it.

  • Not applicablePermissions policy

    This scan predates the crawler recording the headers this check needs. Rescan the site to check it.

  • Not applicableCookie flags

    This scan predates the crawler recording the headers this check needs. Rescan the site to check it.

  • Not applicableVulnerable JavaScript libraries

    No recognisable library versions were found in the sampled scripts.

A passive review of what the crawl recorded: response headers, page and script contents and the URLs it found. It does not probe the site, test TLS settings or look for files that were not linked. Generated automatically; verify each finding against your own site before acting on it.

Earlier scans of charlesmoll.com

No other scans of this site yet.

Sites scoring near charlesmoll.com

Their neighbours in the SEO rank table, which orders every scanned site by health score.

DR is Ahrefs Domain Rating (0-100, backlink strength), used under its Domain Rating License.

This report was produced by the DIY SEO Hub Site Spider crawling charlesmoll.com from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.

Own charlesmoll.com?