Scanned sites / example.com

SEO report for example.com DR 94

The latest Site Spider scan of example.com, with 11 scans on record. Each scan is at its own address, for example /domain/example-com/2026-09-12-1640.

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

Latest scan

Scanned 2026-09-12 16:40:37 UTC, finished 2026-09-12 16:43:44 UTC. Found with brave web search

Site: https://example.com/

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

58/ 100Needs work

On September 12, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 1 page and 2 assets of example.com, starting from https://example.com/. It scored 58 out of 100, a result that needs work. 5 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by title tags (1), indexability (1), meta descriptions (1); 17 checks passed. Most of the points went to title tags (−10), indexability (−10), meta descriptions (−8). 5 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 and 1 low findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
1
Assets fetched
2
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
5 of 27
CoverageComplete crawl

3 of 3 discovered URLs were fetched. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 1 link destination on other sites was checked.

  • Title tags1 issue
    1 of 1 page have title issues.
    −10 points
  • Meta descriptions1 issue
    1 of 1 page have meta description issues.
    −8 points
  • HeadingsOK
    0 of 1 page have heading issues.
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sites1 noted
    0 destinations answered with an error, 1 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), of 1 destination checked.
  • RedirectsOK
    0 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
  • Non-200 responses2 noted
    2 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 0 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.
  • Indexability1 issue
    1 of 1 indexable page have indexability warnings.
    −10 points
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 0 image references have no alt attribute.
  • Heavy assetsOK
    0 assets larger than 500 KB among 2 fetched assets.
  • Orphan pagesOK
    0 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
  • Sitemap coverage1 issue
    No sitemap found. Tried: https://example.com/sitemap.xml (404). Add one at /sitemap.xml or list it in robots.txt.
    −6 points
  • Internal link counts1 noted
    Internal link counts for 1 page; 1 worth a look.
  • Thin content1 issue
    1 of 1 page have fewer than 200 words.
    −8 points
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL formatOK
    All 1 page URL are plain lowercase addresses without parameters.
  • Canonicals1 noted
    1 of 1 page have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directivesOK
    No page carries a robots directive; all 1 page are open to search engines.
  • Anchor textOK
    Every internal link has descriptive, followed anchor text.
  • Title and heading structure1 noted
    1 of 1 page could use the title, heading and snippet space better.
  • Image weight and alt lengthOK
    No image is over 100 KB or carries 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 1 page 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; 4 response headers recorded across 3 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 1 page; 0 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 InsightsOK
    Mobile performance 100 on average across 1 page; 0 below Google's good thresholds.
  • SpellingNot checked
    Not checked: this scan was crawled before this check existed. Scan the site again to run it.

What changed since the last scan

Score unchanged

example.com scored 58 out of 100 in both of its last two scans. Across 11 scans on record the score has ended up where it started, at 58.

  1. 2026-09-10 01:19:59 UTC58/1001 pages
  2. 2026-09-10 16:44:07 UTC58/1001 pages
  3. 2026-09-10 17:40:03 UTC58/1001 pages
  4. 2026-09-10 18:29:14 UTC58/1001 pages
  5. 2026-09-10 22:06:19 UTC58/1001 pages
  6. 2026-09-12 15:36:28 UTC58/1001 pages
  7. 2026-09-12 15:36:28 UTC58/1001 pages
  8. 2026-09-12 15:52:50 UTC58/1001 pages
  9. 2026-09-12 16:32:21 UTC58/1001 pages
  10. 2026-09-12 16:40:37 UTC58/1001 pages

Where this site sits among all scanned sites

2326 sites, median 79%, average 78%

example.com scores 58%, higher than 5% of the 2326 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0571140%: 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%: 1 site34%: 0 sites35%: 2 sites36%: 2 sites37%: 1 site38%: 3 sites39%: 1 site40%: 3 sites41%: 1 site42%: 1 site43%: 3 sites44%: 1 site45%: 4 sites46%: 5 sites47%: 5 sites48%: 3 sites49%: 6 sites50%: 5 sites51%: 5 sites52%: 10 sites53%: 6 sites54%: 8 sites55%: 9 sites56%: 8 sites57%: 12 sites58%: 17 sites59%: 9 sites60%: 16 sites61%: 12 sites62%: 19 sites63%: 27 sites64%: 22 sites65%: 32 sites66%: 35 sites67%: 35 sites68%: 34 sites69%: 47 sites70%: 44 sites71%: 69 sites72%: 71 sites73%: 69 sites74%: 68 sites75%: 72 sites76%: 87 sites77%: 92 sites78%: 106 sites79%: 86 sites80%: 106 sites81%: 105 sites82%: 114 sites83%: 99 sites84%: 107 sites85%: 85 sites86%: 69 sites87%: 76 sites88%: 58 sites89%: 63 sites90%: 34 sites91%: 47 sites92%: 38 sites93%: 23 sites94%: 16 sites95%: 11 sites96%: 10 sites97%: 12 sites98%: 4 sites99%: 1 site100%: 70 sites58% 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.

Your website needs attention in several areas to improve its SEO performance. Follow these prioritized fixes to enhance indexability and content quality.

  1. 1

    Fix Non-200 Responses

    Why: Broken URLs prevent search engines from accessing your site effectively.

    How: Update or remove the links to https://example.com/robots.txt and https://example.com/sitemap.xml. Ensure they point to valid resources.

    Checks: status-codes

  2. 2

    Add a Sitemap

    Why: Sitemaps help search engines index your site more effectively.

    How: Create a sitemap.xml file listing all important pages and upload it to the root directory. Update robots.txt to include it.

    Checks: sitemap-coverage

  3. 3

    Improve Title Tag

    Why: A short title tag can affect click-through rates and SEO rankings.

    How: Change the title tag to be more descriptive, with at least 30-60 characters.

    Checks: titles

  4. 4

    Add a Meta Description

    Why: A missing meta description can lead to lower click-through rates from search results.

    How: Include a meta description of around 150-160 characters that accurately reflects your page content.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  5. 5

    Ensure Indexability

    Why: Lack of a canonical tag can lead to duplicate content issues.

    How: Add a canonical tag in the head section of your HTML to point to the preferred URL.

    Checks: indexability

  6. 6

    Expand Thin Content

    Why: Thin content can harm your search visibility; aim for richer, more engaging content.

    How: Add at least 200 words of relevant information to your page to enhance its value.

    Checks: thin-content

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

Your website lacks several important security headers, making it vulnerable to various attacks such as script injection and clickjacking. Implementing these headers is critical to enhance visitor safety and data integrity.

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

    Missing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)Medium

    Why it matters: Without HSTS, users can be intercepted on their first request if they type the URL 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: The absence of a CSP means no restrictions on where scripts and styles can be loaded from, increasing risk of XSS attacks.

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

    Evidence: Content Security Policy

  3. 3

    Missing X-Frame-OptionsMedium

    Why it matters: Without this header, your page can be embedded in a frame by malicious sites, leading to clickjacking attacks.

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

    Evidence: Clickjacking protection

  4. 4

    Missing X-Content-Type-OptionsLow

    Why it matters: Without this header, browsers may execute files as scripts based on their contents, leading to potential security vulnerabilities.

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

    Evidence: MIME sniffing protection

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://example.com/ → no strict-transport-security
  • FoundContent Security PolicyMedium

    None of the 1 HTML page 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://example.com/ → 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://example.com/ → 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://example.com/ → no x-content-type-options
6 checks passed, 6 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 1 crawled page 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.

  • 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.

  • OKThird-party scripts

    The sampled pages load no scripts from other domains.

  • 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 applicableForms over HTTPS

    No forms were found on the sampled pages.

  • Not applicableVulnerable JavaScript libraries

    No recognisable library versions were found in the sampled scripts.

  • Not applicableSensitive paths in robots.txt

    No robots.txt was fetched.

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 example.com

Sites scoring near example.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 example.com from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.

Own example.com?