Scanned sites / manscapinglawncare.com / 2026-09-13-1422

manscapinglawncare.com scan from 2026-09-13 14:22:38 UTC DR 1

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

Scan 2026-09-13-1422

Scanned 2026-09-13 14:22:38 UTC, finished 2026-09-13 14:54:11 UTC. Found on page 3 of brave web search results

Site: https://manscapinglawncare.com/

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

93/ 100Excellent

On September 13, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 160 pages and 238 assets of manscapinglawncare.com, starting from https://manscapinglawncare.com/. It scored 93 out of 100, an excellent result. 7 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by title tags (39), heavy assets (3), meta descriptions (22); 11 checks passed. Most of the points went to title tags (−3), heavy assets (−1.8), meta descriptions (−1.3). 9 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: Medium2 medium, 1 low and 1 info findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
160
Assets fetched
238
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
7 of 27
CoverageComplete crawl

398 of 400 discovered URLs were fetched, 2 blocked by robots.txt. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 5 link destinations on other sites were checked.

  • Title tags39 issues
    39 of 131 pages have title issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
    −3 points
  • Meta descriptions22 issues
    22 of 131 pages have meta description issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
    −1.3 points
  • Headings1 issue
    1 of 131 pages have heading issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sites396 noted
    0 destinations answered with an error, 3 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), of 5 destinations checked.
  • Redirects28 issues
    28 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
    −0.8 points
  • Non-200 responses28 noted
    28 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 28 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.
  • Indexability2 issues
    2 of 132 indexable pages have indexability warnings.
    −0.2 points
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 295 image references have no alt attribute. 3 use an empty alt (decorative), which is fine.
  • Heavy assets3 issues
    3 assets larger than 500 KB among 238 fetched assets.
    −1.8 points
  • Orphan pagesOK
    0 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
  • Sitemap coverage3 issues
    1 sitemap listing 129 URLs: 3 crawled pages missing, 0 listed URLs broken or redirecting, 0 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −0.1 points
  • Internal link counts1 noted
    Internal link counts for 132 pages; 1 worth a look.
  • Thin contentOK
    0 of 131 pages have fewer than 200 words. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL formatOK
    All 160 page URLs are plain lowercase addresses without parameters.
  • Canonicals2 noted
    2 of 132 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives132 noted
    132 pages carry a robots directive; 0 carry none.
  • Anchor text29 noted
    29 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure8 noted
    8 of 131 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 1 noindex or canonicalized page 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 132 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 398 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 132 pages; 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 Insights5 noted
    Mobile performance 56 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 scan sits among all scanned sites

2873 sites, median 80%, average 79%

manscapinglawncare.com scores 93%, higher than 91% 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 sites93% 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 site's health is excellent, but there are some SEO issues to address. Focus on fixing redirect chains, non-200 responses, title and meta description lengths, heading structure, and sitemap coverage.

  1. 1

    Fix Redirects

    Why: Redirects can confuse search engines and dilute page authority.

    How: Update URLs to point directly to final destinations rather than redirecting.

    Checks: redirects

  2. 2

    Resolve Non-200 Responses

    Why: Pages not returning 2xx responses can negatively affect SEO and user experience.

    How: Check and fix URLs to ensure they return successful (200) responses.

    Checks: status-codes

  3. 3

    Optimize Title Tags

    Why: Long title tags can cut off in search results, reducing click-through rates.

    How: Revise 34 title tags to be under 60 characters for clarity.

    Checks: titles

  4. 4

    Revise Meta Descriptions

    Why: Meta descriptions should be concise to entice clicks from search results.

    How: Update the 4 problematic meta descriptions to be under 160 characters.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  5. 5

    Add Missing Heading

    Why: Proper heading structure improves content organization and SEO.

    How: Add a relevant H1 tag to the page that currently has none (cookie policy).

    Checks: headings

  6. 6

    Update Sitemap

    Why: Having an accurate sitemap ensures better indexing by search engines.

    How: Add the 3 missing crawled and indexable pages to your sitemap.

    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 site has significant security shortcomings, including the absence of a Content Security Policy, and use of an outdated jQuery version with known vulnerabilities. These issues can expose your site to various attacks and should be addressed promptly.

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

    Missing Content Security PolicyMedium

    Why it matters: Without a CSP, attackers can potentially load malicious scripts, styles, or frames on your site.

    Fix: Implement a Content Security Policy header: `Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self';`.

    Evidence: Content Security Policy

  2. 2

    Vulnerable JavaScript LibraryMedium

    Why it matters: Using jQuery 1.8.3 exposes the site to known vulnerabilities which can be exploited depending on its usage.

    Fix: Upgrade jQuery to at least version 3.5.0 to mitigate these vulnerabilities.

    Evidence: Vulnerable JavaScript libraries

  3. 3

    Third-Party Scripts Without Subresource IntegrityLow

    Why it matters: Scripts from external domains can be modified by attackers, leading to unauthorized code running on your site.

    Fix: Consider implementing a Content Security Policy that specifies trusted sources, or use Subresource Integrity for scripts.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

  4. 4

    Sensitive Paths in robots.txtInfo

    Why it matters: The public listing of `/wp-admin/` may guide attackers to exploit the admin interface.

    Fix: Ensure real access control for sensitive paths rather than solely relying on robots.txt.

    Evidence: Sensitive paths in robots.txt

What the checks found

  • FoundContent Security PolicyMedium

    None of the 132 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://manscapinglawncare.com/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/home/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/about-us/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/about-us/blog/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/about-us/reviews/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/gardening/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/landscape-design/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/landscape-hedging/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/landscape-lighting/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/landscaper/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://manscapinglawncare.com/landscaping/landscaping-company/ → no content-security-policy
  • FoundVulnerable JavaScript librariesMedium

    1 library with published vulnerabilities: jQuery 1.8.3. Whether they are exploitable depends on how the site uses them, but each has a fixed release.

    • jQuery 1.8.3 in https://manscapinglawncare.com/wp-content/themes/land9/scripts/jquery.min.js: CVE-2012-6708 (selector XSS), CVE-2015-9251, CVE-2019-11358, CVE-2020-11022, CVE-2020-11023; fixed in 3.5.0
  • 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.)

    • kit.fontawesome.com (40 script tags)
    • www.google.com (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/
9 checks passed, 3 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 132 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKHTTP Strict Transport Security

    strict-transport-security is set on all 132 HTML pages.

  • OKClickjacking protection

    x-frame-options is set on all 132 HTML pages.

  • OKMIME sniffing protection

    x-content-type-options is set on all 132 HTML pages.

  • OKSoftware version disclosure

    No Server or X-Powered-By header is sent.

  • OKMixed content

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

  • OKForms over HTTPS

    41 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.

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.

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

Own manscapinglawncare.com?

  • Claim this site to manage the listing, hide it from the public lists, or keep it.
  • Want it gone instead? Ask through the support form or e-mail support@diyseohub.com, naming manscapinglawncare.com. Removal needs no account and no proof of purchase.