Scanned sites / reddeereyecare.com / 2026-09-11-1236

reddeereyecare.com scan from 2026-09-11 12:36:23 UTC DR 7

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

Scan 2026-09-11-1236

Scanned 2026-09-11 12:36:23 UTC, finished 2026-09-11 13:32:07 UTC

Site: https://reddeereyecare.com/

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

76/ 100Good

On September 11, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 564 pages and 543 assets of reddeereyecare.com, starting from https://reddeereyecare.com/. It scored 76 out of 100, a good result. 11 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by meta descriptions (411), heavy assets (20), sitemap coverage (326); 7 checks passed. Most of the points went to meta descriptions (−6.4), heavy assets (−6), sitemap coverage (−3.8). 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: Medium1 medium, 1 low and 1 info findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
564
Assets fetched
543
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
11 of 27
CoverageJob finished, partial coverage

1,107 of 1,851 discovered URLs were fetched, 744 failed, 18 left out by the 5,000-page and 1,000-asset budget. The job finished, but the crawl did not reach everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 300 link destinations on other sites were checked, 285 left unchecked.

  • Title tags173 issues
    173 of 449 pages have title issues. 61 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −3.4 points
  • Meta descriptions411 issues
    411 of 449 pages have meta description issues. 61 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −6.4 points
  • Headings76 issues
    76 of 449 pages have heading issues. 61 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −0.9 points
  • Broken links6 issues
    18 internal links point at 6 broken URLs.
    −0.2 points
  • Links to other sites9 issues
    9 destinations answered with an error, 111 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), 285 were left unchecked by the per-scan cap, of 300 destinations checked.
    −0.7 points
  • Redirects60 issues
    49 redirecting URLs, 24 of them chained.
    −0.5 points
  • Non-200 responses6 issues
    993 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 54 of them are pages, 6 with an error status; the rest are assets or redirects.
    −0.1 points
  • Rate limitedOK
    The site did not rate limit the crawler.
  • Indexability1 issue
    1 of 450 indexable pages have indexability warnings. 60 pages noindex by design.
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 1770 image references have no alt attribute. 589 use an empty alt (decorative), which is fine.
  • Heavy assets20 issues
    20 assets larger than 500 KB among 543 fetched assets.
    −6 points
  • Orphan pages321 issues
    321 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
    −2.5 points
  • Sitemap coverage326 issues
    1 sitemap listing 445 URLs: 5 crawled pages missing, 0 listed URLs broken or redirecting, 321 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −3.8 points
  • Internal link counts61 noted
    Internal link counts for 500 pages; 61 worth a look.
  • Thin contentOK
    0 of 449 pages have fewer than 200 words. 61 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL format96 noted
    96 of 564 page URLs are harder to read, share or cache than they need to be.
  • Canonicals1 noted
    1 of 510 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives509 noted
    509 pages carry a robots directive; 1 carries none.
  • Anchor text5 noted
    5 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure119 noted
    119 of 449 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 61 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Image weight and alt length13 noted
    13 images over 100 KB; 0 with alt text over 100 characters.
  • Response anomalies6 noted
    6 URLs answered in a way worth looking at.
  • 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 510 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; 16 response headers recorded across 1107 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 510 pages; 410 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 67 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

2864 sites, median 80%, average 79%

reddeereyecare.com scores 76%, higher than 32% of the 2864 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0751490%: 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%: 42 sites68%: 42 sites69%: 52 sites70%: 46 sites71%: 79 sites72%: 76 sites73%: 81 sites74%: 82 sites75%: 87 sites76%: 95 sites77%: 108 sites78%: 131 sites79%: 111 sites80%: 127 sites81%: 124 sites82%: 132 sites83%: 121 sites84%: 130 sites85%: 107 sites86%: 94 sites87%: 94 sites88%: 81 sites89%: 75 sites90%: 55 sites91%: 58 sites92%: 43 sites93%: 28 sites94%: 25 sites95%: 15 sites96%: 18 sites97%: 16 sites98%: 7 sites99%: 3 sites100%: 149 sites76% 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 several technical issues that require attention. Prioritizing fixes for broken links, redirects, and meta descriptions can significantly improve your site's health and user experience.

  1. 1

    Fix Broken Links

    Why: Addressing 18 broken internal links improves user experience and site navigation.

    How: Use a tool like Screaming Frog to identify and update or remove these links.

    Checks: broken-links

  2. 2

    Reduce Redirects

    Why: Eliminating 24 chained redirects will streamline page access and increase loading speed.

    How: Identify each redirect and update internal links to point directly to the final URL.

    Checks: redirects

  3. 3

    Resolve Non-200 Responses

    Why: Fixing the 993 URLs with non-2xx errors will enhance site accessibility and SEO.

    How: Audit the URLs, correcting or removing those that are broken.

    Checks: status-codes

  4. 4

    Improve Title Tags

    Why: Correcting title issues on 172 pages enhances relevancy and click-through rates.

    How: Rewrite short or duplicate titles to be unique and within recommended length.

    Checks: titles

  5. 5

    Update Meta Descriptions

    Why: Addressing 371 meta description issues boosts search visibility and engagement.

    How: Craft compelling meta descriptions for each affected page to improve click rates.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  6. 6

    Add Heading Tags

    Why: Resolving 76 heading issues will improve content structure and SEO optimization.

    How: Ensure each page has a single H1 tag and add relevant subheadings (H2, H3) as needed.

    Checks: headings

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 some security concerns that should be addressed. A vulnerable version of jQuery is present, which may pose risks depending on usage. Additionally, several third-party scripts lack Subresource Integrity, and sensitive paths are exposed in the robots.txt file. Prompt action is recommended to mitigate these risks.

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

    Vulnerable JavaScript LibraryMedium

    Why it matters: jQuery version 1.9.1 has known vulnerabilities that could lead to cross-site scripting and prototype pollution.

    Fix: Upgrade jQuery to version 3.5.0 or later to eliminate these vulnerabilities.

    Evidence: Vulnerable JavaScript libraries

  2. 2

    Third-Party Scripts Lack Integrity ChecksLow

    Why it matters: Scripts from multiple domains do not include Subresource Integrity, increasing the risk of malicious script execution.

    Fix: Implement Subresource Integrity or a Content-Security-Policy to restrict script sources.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

  3. 3

    Sensitive Path in robots.txtInfo

    Why it matters: The robots.txt file exposes the /wp-admin/ path, which could assist attackers in probing the site.

    Fix: Restrict access to sensitive paths using proper authentication mechanisms instead of relying on robots.txt.

    Evidence: Sensitive paths in robots.txt

What the checks found

  • FoundVulnerable JavaScript librariesMedium

    1 library with published vulnerabilities: jQuery 1.9.1. Whether they are exploitable depends on how the site uses them, but each has a fixed release.

    • jQuery 1.9.1 in https://reddeereyecare.com/wp-content/themes/understrap/js/theme.min.js?ver=2.7…: CVE-2015-9251 (XSS via cross-domain AJAX), CVE-2019-11358 (prototype pollution), CVE-2020-11022, CVE-2020-11023 (XSS via HTML passed to DOM methods); fixed in 3.5.0
  • NoteThird-party scripts

    Scripts run from 6 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.)

    • data.staticfiles.io (40 script tags)
    • tag.validate.audio (40 script tags)
    • player.vimeo.com (1 script tag)
    • unpkg.com (39 script tags)
    • cdnjs.cloudflare.com (20 script tags)
    • embed.typeform.com (1 script tag)
  • 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/
10 checks passed, 3 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 510 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKHTTP Strict Transport Security

    strict-transport-security is set on all 510 HTML pages.

  • OKContent Security Policy

    A Content-Security-Policy is set.

  • OKClickjacking protection

    x-frame-options is set on all 510 HTML pages.

  • OKMIME sniffing protection

    x-content-type-options is set on all 510 HTML pages.

  • 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

    14 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 reddeereyecare.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 reddeereyecare.com from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.

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