Scanned sites / miguelcarrasco.com

SEO report for miguelcarrasco.com DR 6

The latest Site Spider scan of miguelcarrasco.com, with 1 scan on record. Each scan is at its own address, for example /domain/miguelcarrasco-com/2026-10-19-2313.

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

Latest scan

Scanned 2026-10-19 23:13:39 UTC, finished 2026-10-19 23:15:31 UTC

Site: https://miguelcarrasco.com/

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

69/ 100Needs work

On October 19, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 1 page and 5 assets of miguelcarrasco.com, starting from https://miguelcarrasco.com/. It scored 69 out of 100, a result that needs work. 5 of 31 checks found something to fix, led by title tags (1), thin content (1), headings (1); 25 checks passed. Most of the points went to title tags (−10), thin content (−8), headings (−6). 1 check found something the score does not count, listed as noted. 6 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
1
Assets fetched
5
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
5 of 31
CoverageComplete crawl

6 of 6 discovered URLs were fetched. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript.

  • Title tags1 issue
    1 of 1 page have title issues.
    −10 points
  • Meta descriptionsOK
    0 of 1 page have meta description issues.
  • Headings1 issue
    1 of 1 page have heading issues.
    −6 points
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sitesNot checked
    Not checked: the crawl fetched nothing this check can look at.
  • RedirectsOK
    0 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
  • Non-200 responsesOK
    0 URLs did not return a 2xx response.
  • Rate limitedOK
    The site did not rate limit the crawler.
  • IndexabilityOK
    0 of 1 indexable page have indexability warnings.
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 0 image references have no alt attribute.
  • Heavy assets1 issue
    1 asset larger than 500 KB among 5 fetched assets.
    −0.6 points
  • Orphan pagesOK
    0 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
  • Sitemap coverage1 issue
    1 sitemap listing 0 URLs: 1 crawled page missing, 0 listed URLs broken or redirecting, 0 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −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.
  • CanonicalsOK
    0 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 structureOK
    0 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 validationOK
    All 1 page keep their head tags in <head>, once each, under Googlebot's 2 MB.
  • hreflangOK
    No page declares hreflang.
  • Structured dataOK
    1 of 1 indexable page carry structured data: WebSite (1), Person (1). 0 pages with errors a rich result would fail on.
  • Near duplicatesOK
    No near duplicates among 0 pages with enough text to compare.
  • 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.
  • PaginationOK
    No page declares rel=next or rel=prev pagination.
  • Headers and cookiesOK
    1 cookie set by the site; 7 response headers recorded across 6 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 InsightsNot checked
    Not checked yet: PageSpeed Insights runs on the top pages once the crawl has finished.
  • SpellingOK
    No unfamiliar lower-case words on 1 page (English pages only).

Where this site sits among all scanned sites

2314 sites, median 79%, average 78%

miguelcarrasco.com scores 69%, higher than 16% of the 2314 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0591170%: 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%: 8 sites60%: 16 sites61%: 12 sites62%: 19 sites63%: 27 sites64%: 22 sites65%: 32 sites66%: 36 sites67%: 34 sites68%: 35 sites69%: 46 sites70%: 44 sites71%: 68 sites72%: 70 sites73%: 69 sites74%: 69 sites75%: 71 sites76%: 87 sites77%: 91 sites78%: 107 sites79%: 85 sites80%: 104 sites81%: 105 sites82%: 117 sites83%: 98 sites84%: 108 sites85%: 86 sites86%: 69 sites87%: 73 sites88%: 59 sites89%: 60 sites90%: 34 sites91%: 44 sites92%: 38 sites93%: 22 sites94%: 16 sites95%: 11 sites96%: 9 sites97%: 12 sites98%: 4 sites99%: 1 site100%: 70 sites69% 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

Your site needs improvements in SEO aspects like title tags, headings, and content. Addressing these priorities will enhance visibility and user experience.

  1. 1

    Fix Title Tag Length

    Why: The title is too long, affecting visibility in search results.

    How: Shorten the title to under 60 characters, focusing on key terms.

    Checks: titles

  2. 2

    Add H1 Tag

    Why: Your page is missing an H1, which is crucial for SEO and user readability.

    How: Add a descriptive H1 tag to introduce the page content.

    Checks: headings

  3. 3

    Optimize Heavy Asset Size

    Why: The large asset can slow page loading, impacting user experience.

    How: Compress the JS file or consider breaking it into smaller parts.

    Checks: heavy-assets

  4. 4

    Update Sitemap

    Why: The sitemap doesn't list the crawled page, missing indexing opportunities.

    How: Ensure the sitemap includes the main URL for proper indexing.

    Checks: sitemap-coverage

  5. 5

    Enhance Page Content

    Why: The page has less than 200 words, which is considered thin content.

    How: Add more relevant content to meet or exceed the word count threshold.

    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

The website lacks several important security headers, making it susceptible to various attacks, including interception and clickjacking. Immediate implementation of these headers is critical to improve overall security.

  • 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 on their first request when typing the site address without https://.

    Fix: Add the header: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains.

    Evidence: HTTP Strict Transport Security

  2. 2

    Missing Content Security Policy (CSP)Medium

    Why it matters: Absence of CSP allows uncontrolled loading of scripts and resources, increasing risk of XSS attacks.

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

    Evidence: Content Security Policy

  3. 3

    Missing X-Frame-Options HeaderMedium

    Why it matters: Without this header, the site can be embedded in frames on other pages, leading to clickjacking vulnerabilities.

    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, browsers may execute files as scripts based on their contents, risking content misinterpretation.

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

    Evidence: MIME sniffing protection

  5. 5

    Missing Referrer-Policy HeaderLow

    Why it matters: Without a Referrer-Policy, sensitive page information can be leaked to other sites.

    Fix: Add the header: Referrer-Policy: no-referrer.

    Evidence: Referrer policy

  6. 6

    Missing Permissions-Policy HeaderInfo

    Why it matters: This header allows limiting browser features that injected scripts could exploit, enhancing security.

    Fix: Add the header: Permissions-Policy: not allowed.

    Evidence: Permissions policy

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://miguelcarrasco.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://miguelcarrasco.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://miguelcarrasco.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://miguelcarrasco.com/ → no x-content-type-options
  • FoundReferrer policyLow

    No HTML page sends referrer-policy. Without a Referrer-Policy the full page address, including any query string, is sent to every site a visitor clicks through to.

    • https://miguelcarrasco.com/ → no referrer-policy
  • FoundPermissions policyInfo

    No HTML page sends permissions-policy. A Permissions-Policy header turns off browser features the site does not use (camera, microphone, geolocation), limiting what an injected script could do.

    • https://miguelcarrasco.com/ → no permissions-policy
8 checks passed, 2 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.

  • OKCookie flags

    All 1 cookie carry Secure, HttpOnly and SameSite flags.

  • 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.

  • OKSensitive paths in robots.txt

    robots.txt does not point at admin, backup or private paths.

  • 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.

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 miguelcarrasco.com

No other scans of this site yet.

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

Own miguelcarrasco.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 miguelcarrasco.com. Removal needs no account and no proof of purchase.