Scanned sites / reroofingfargo.com

SEO report for reroofingfargo.com DR 0

The latest Site Spider scan of reroofingfargo.com, with 1 scan on record. Each scan is at its own address, for example /domain/reroofingfargo-com/2026-09-13-0332.

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

Latest scan

Scanned 2026-09-13 03:32:25 UTC, finished 2026-09-13 04:07:08 UTC. Found on page 5 of brave web search results

Site: https://reroofingfargo.com/

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

73/ 100Needs work

On September 13, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 349 pages and 366 assets of reroofingfargo.com, starting from https://reroofingfargo.com/. It scored 73 out of 100, a result that needs work. 11 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by title tags (22), meta descriptions (23), sitemap coverage (313); 7 checks passed. Most of the points went to title tags (−7.9), meta descriptions (−6.6), sitemap coverage (−6). 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: Medium3 medium and 3 low findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
349
Assets fetched
366
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
11 of 27
CoverageComplete crawl

715 of 715 discovered URLs were fetched. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 12 link destinations on other sites were checked.

  • Title tags22 issues
    22 of 25 pages have title issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −7.9 points
  • Meta descriptions23 issues
    23 of 25 pages have meta description issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −6.6 points
  • Headings4 issues
    4 of 25 pages have heading issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −0.9 points
  • Broken links2 issues
    2 internal links point at 2 broken URLs.
    −1.4 points
  • Links to other sites1 issue
    1 destination answered with an error, 7 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), of 12 destinations checked.
    −0.4 points
  • Redirects10 issues
    319 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
    −1.4 points
  • Non-200 responses2 issues
    329 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 321 of them are pages, 2 with an error status; the rest are assets or redirects.
    −0.7 points
  • Rate limitedOK
    The site did not rate limit the crawler.
  • Indexability3 issues
    3 of 27 indexable pages have indexability warnings. 1 page noindex by design. 1 noindex page is listed in the sitemap, which asks search engines both to visit and to ignore it.
    −1.1 points
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 22 image references have no alt attribute.
  • Heavy assetsOK
    0 assets larger than 500 KB among 366 fetched assets.
  • Orphan pages3 issues
    3 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
    −0.4 points
  • Sitemap coverage313 issues
    9 sitemaps listing 335 URLs: 0 crawled pages missing, 309 listed URLs broken or redirecting, 2 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −6 points
  • Internal link counts1 noted
    Internal link counts for 28 pages; 1 worth a look.
  • Thin content1 issue
    1 of 25 pages have fewer than 200 words. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −0.3 points
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL format115 noted
    115 of 349 page URLs are harder to read, share or cache than they need to be.
  • Canonicals3 noted
    3 of 28 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives28 noted
    28 pages carry a robots directive; 0 carry none.
  • Anchor text7 noted
    7 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure18 noted
    18 of 25 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Image weight and alt length18 noted
    0 images over 100 KB; 18 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 28 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; 11 response headers recorded across 715 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 28 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 74 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

2348 sites, median 79%, average 78%

reroofingfargo.com scores 73%, higher than 26% of the 2348 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%: 7 sites50%: 5 sites51%: 5 sites52%: 10 sites53%: 6 sites54%: 8 sites55%: 9 sites56%: 8 sites57%: 12 sites58%: 18 sites59%: 8 sites60%: 16 sites61%: 12 sites62%: 20 sites63%: 27 sites64%: 22 sites65%: 32 sites66%: 35 sites67%: 36 sites68%: 34 sites69%: 47 sites70%: 44 sites71%: 69 sites72%: 71 sites73%: 70 sites74%: 68 sites75%: 72 sites76%: 87 sites77%: 91 sites78%: 106 sites79%: 86 sites80%: 107 sites81%: 106 sites82%: 114 sites83%: 102 sites84%: 108 sites85%: 88 sites86%: 70 sites87%: 73 sites88%: 59 sites89%: 66 sites90%: 36 sites91%: 47 sites92%: 39 sites93%: 24 sites94%: 17 sites95%: 12 sites96%: 12 sites97%: 12 sites98%: 5 sites99%: 2 sites100%: 68 sites73% 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 shows some areas needing improvement, particularly broken links, redirects, and title/meta description issues. Addressing these will enhance user experience and SEO performance.

  1. 1

    Fix Broken Links

    Why: Broken links hurt user experience and SEO.

    How: Update or remove links to the URLs mentioned in the findings.

    Checks: broken-links

  2. 2

    Consolidate Redirects

    Why: Too many redirects can slow down your site.

    How: Identify and consolidate 319 redirecting URLs to direct links.

    Checks: redirects

  3. 3

    Resolve Non-200 Responses

    Why: Non-200 responses hinder accessibility and SEO.

    How: Fix or remove the URLs that don't return a 2xx status.

    Checks: status-codes

  4. 4

    Optimize Title Tags

    Why: Improper title lengths can affect SERP rankings.

    How: Shorten the titles to within 60 characters for all flagged pages.

    Checks: titles

  5. 5

    Improve Meta Descriptions

    Why: Meta descriptions impact click-through rates.

    How: Ensure descriptions are under 160 characters and unique for each page.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  6. 6

    Fix Heading Issues

    Why: Multiple H1s can confuse search engines.

    How: Ensure each page has only one H1 tag.

    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 website lacks important security headers, which can lead to vulnerabilities like interception of traffic, clickjacking, and improper handling of scripts. Implementing the recommended security headers is critical for improving the site's security posture.

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

    Missing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)Medium

    Why it matters: HSTS protects against MITM attacks by ensuring users access the site via 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: A CSP helps prevent cross-site scripting by controlling sources for scripts and styles.

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

    Evidence: Content Security Policy

  3. 3

    Missing X-Frame-Options HeaderMedium

    Why it matters: Without this header, the site is vulnerable to clickjacking attacks.

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

    Evidence: Clickjacking protection

  4. 4

    Missing X-Content-Type-Options HeaderLow

    Why it matters: This header prevents browsers from interpreting files as a different content type.

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

    Evidence: MIME sniffing protection

  5. 5

    Server Version DisclosureLow

    Why it matters: Exposing server versions allows attackers to find known vulnerabilities.

    Fix: Configure the server to hide version details or use a reverse proxy to obfuscate them.

    Evidence: Software version disclosure

  6. 6

    Third-party Scripts Missing Subresource Integrity (SRI)Low

    Why it matters: Without SRI, third-party scripts can be compromised and lead to malicious code execution.

    Fix: Consider adding Subresource Integrity checks or implementing a CSP to limit script sources.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

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://reroofingfargo.com/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/contact/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-re-roof/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-roof-repair/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-siding/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/seamless-gutter-company-fargo/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing-info/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/do-i-need-roof-repair-or-replacement/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/how-long-does-a-roof-last/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/uncategorized/roofing-and-siding-products-and-services/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/west-fargo/west-fargo-roofing-and-siding-company/ → no strict-transport-security
  • FoundContent Security PolicyMedium

    None of the 28 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://reroofingfargo.com/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/contact/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-re-roof/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-roof-repair/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-siding/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/seamless-gutter-company-fargo/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing-info/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/do-i-need-roof-repair-or-replacement/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/how-long-does-a-roof-last/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/uncategorized/roofing-and-siding-products-and-services/ → no content-security-policy
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/west-fargo/west-fargo-roofing-and-siding-company/ → 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://reroofingfargo.com/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/contact/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-re-roof/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-roof-repair/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-siding/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/seamless-gutter-company-fargo/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing-info/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/do-i-need-roof-repair-or-replacement/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/how-long-does-a-roof-last/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/uncategorized/roofing-and-siding-products-and-services/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/west-fargo/west-fargo-roofing-and-siding-company/ → 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://reroofingfargo.com/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/contact/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-re-roof/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-roofing-contractor/fargo-roof-repair/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/fargo-siding/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/seamless-gutter-company-fargo/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing-info/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/do-i-need-roof-repair-or-replacement/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/roofing/how-long-does-a-roof-last/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/uncategorized/roofing-and-siding-products-and-services/ → no x-content-type-options
    • https://reroofingfargo.com/west-fargo/west-fargo-roofing-and-siding-company/ → no x-content-type-options
  • FoundSoftware version disclosureLow

    Responses reveal the exact server or framework version, which lets an attacker look up known vulnerabilities for it without guessing.

    • server: nginx/1.29.8 (362 responses)
    • server: Apache (353 responses)
  • NoteThird-party scripts

    Scripts run from 1 other domain 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.)

    • stats.wp.com (28 script tags)
7 checks passed, 3 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 28 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKMixed content

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

  • OKForms over HTTPS

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

  • OKVulnerable JavaScript libraries

    1 library version recognised, none with known vulnerabilities.

  • 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.

  • OKSensitive paths in robots.txt

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

  • 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.

Earlier scans of reroofingfargo.com

No other scans of this site yet.

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

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