Scanned sites / trends.google.com / 2026-10-22-0601
trends.google.com scan from 2026-10-22 06:01:51 UTC DR 100
DR is Ahrefs Domain Rating (0-100, backlink strength), used under its Domain Rating License.
Scan 2026-10-22-0601
Scanned 2026-10-22 06:01:51 UTC, finished 2026-10-22 06:02:42 UTC. Found with 42backlinks.com tool directory
Site: https://trends.google.com/
Download SQLite databaseEvery page and asset from this scan, with the crawl events, in one file.
On October 22, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 5 pages and 5 assets of trends.google.com, starting from https://trends.google.com/. It scored 78 out of 100, a good result. 7 of 33 checks found something to fix, led by title tags (3), meta descriptions (2), image alt text (42); 17 checks passed. Most of the points went to title tags (−7.5), meta descriptions (−4), image alt text (−3.2). 9 checks found something the score does not count, listed as noted. 4 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: Medium4 medium and 1 low findings. See the security findings ↓
- Pages crawled
- 5
- Assets fetched
- 5
- Status
- Completed
- Checks with issues
- 7 of 33
10 of 10 discovered URLs were fetched. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 26 link destinations on other sites were checked.
- Title tags3 issues3 of 3 pages have title issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.−7.5 points
- Meta descriptions2 issues2 of 3 pages have meta description issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.−4 points
- HeadingsOK0 of 3 pages have heading issues. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
- Broken linksOK0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
- Links to other sites1 issue1 destination answered with an error, 6 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), of 26 destinations checked.−0.4 points
- Redirects2 noted2 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
- Non-200 responses3 noted3 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 1 of them is a page, 0 with an error status; the rest are assets or redirects.
- Rate limitedOKThe site did not rate limit the crawler.
- Indexability1 issue1 of 4 indexable pages have indexability warnings.−2.5 points
- Image alt text42 issues42 of 79 image references have no alt attribute. 34 use an empty alt (decorative), which is fine.−3.2 points
- Heavy assetsOK0 assets larger than 500 KB among 5 fetched assets.
- Orphan pages1 issue1 page have no internal links pointing at them.−1 points
- Sitemap coverage2 issuesNo sitemap found. Tried: https://trends.google.com/sitemap.xml (301), https://trends.google.com/trends/sitemap.xml (404). Add one at /sitemap.xml or list it in robots.txt.−3 points
- Internal link counts1 notedInternal link counts for 4 pages; 1 worth a look.
- Thin contentOK0 of 3 pages have fewer than 200 words. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
- Duplicate contentOK0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
- URL format1 noted1 of 5 page URLs are harder to read, share or cache than they need to be.
- Canonicals1 noted1 of 4 pages have a canonical worth checking.
- Robots directivesOKNo page carries a robots directive; all 4 pages are open to search engines.
- Anchor textOKEvery internal link has descriptive, followed anchor text.
- Title and heading structure3 noted3 of 3 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 1 noindex or canonicalized page excluded.
- Image weight and alt lengthOKNo image is over 100 KB or carries alt text over 100 characters.
- Response anomaliesOKNo redirect loops, header redirects or pages served as something other than HTML.
- HTML and head validationOKAll 4 pages keep their head tags in <head>, once each, under Googlebot's 2 MB.
- hreflangOKNo page declares hreflang.
- Structured dataOK2 of 3 indexable pages carry structured data: WebSite (2), Organization (2). 0 pages with errors a rich result would fail on.
- Near duplicates2 noted2 pages in 1 group read almost the same as another page (95% alike or more).
- Soft 404sOKNone of 4 pages answering 200 reads like an error page.
- AccessibilityNot checkedNot checked: the accessibility audit runs in the browser. Tick "Include JavaScript rendering checks" when you request a scan to run it.
- Link positionsOK0 of 2 linked pages are linked only from the template, never from another page's content.
- PaginationOKNo page declares rel=next or rel=prev pagination.
- Headers and cookies1 noted1 cookie set by the site, 1 missing a protective flag; 14 response headers recorded across 10 URLs.
- Orphans in searchNot checkedNot checked: import a Search Console Pages export on the scan page to find pages Google shows that the site does not link to.
- Link ScoreOKLink Score (internal PageRank, 0-100) for 4 pages; 0 hold almost none (10 or less).
- JavaScript renderingNot checkedNot 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 checkedNot checked yet: PageSpeed Insights runs on the top pages once the crawl has finished.
- Spelling31 noted31 words an English dictionary does not know, on 3 pages. Product names and jargon will appear here too.
Where this scan sits among all scanned sites
2305 sites, median 79%, average 78%
trends.google.com scores 78%, higher than 42% of the 2305 scanned sites. See the full ranking.
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...
Fix plan
Written by gpt-4o-mini from the scan findingsThe site has a few significant SEO issues that need addressing, including missing sitemaps, duplicate titles, and meta descriptions. These changes will enhance search visibility and user experience.
- 1
Create a Sitemap
Why: A sitemap helps search engines index your site better.
How: Create a sitemap and place it at /sitemap.xml. Also update robots.txt to link it.
Checks: sitemap-coverage
- 2
Fix Title Duplication
Why: Unique titles improve user engagement and SEO.
How: Update the titles of the affected pages to be distinct and relevant.
Evidence: 2 pages share the title "Google Trends", which usually means one template writes it for all of them.
2 pages affected
Depends on: If these pages really are the same content, the duplicate title is a symptom: canonicalise them to one URL instead.
Checks: titles
- 3
Correct Meta Descriptions
Why: Unique meta descriptions can enhance click-through rates.
How: Provide distinct, relevant meta descriptions for the pages in question.
Evidence: 2 pages share the meta description "Explore search interest of terms and topics by time, locati…", which usually means one template writes it for all of them.
2 pages affected
Depends on: If these pages really are the same content, the duplicate meta description is a symptom: canonicalise them to one URL instead.
Checks: meta-descriptions
- 4
Resolve Indexability Warning
Why: Clear indexability issues ensure all important content is crawled.
How: Add a viewport meta tag to the flagged page.
Evidence: One page flagged: No viewport meta.
1 page affected
Checks: indexability
- 5
Add Alt Text to Images
Why: Alt text improves accessibility and SEO for images.
How: Provide relevant alt text for the images missing it.
Checks: images-alt
- 6
Address Redirects
Why: Fixing redirects ensures users access the correct content smoothly.
How: Update or remove the two URLs causing redirections to ensure they lead to live pages.
Checks: redirects
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 crawlThe website has a few critical security vulnerabilities, including missing HTTP Strict Transport Security and proper cookie flags. While some pages have Clickjacking protection, it’s incomplete. Also, the Content Security Policy allows unsafe scripts, which weakens overall protection. Immediate action is recommended to enhance security.
- 0 high
- 4 medium
- 1 low
- 0 info
- 1
Missing HTTP Strict Transport SecurityMedium
Why it matters: Without HSTS, users could access the site over unsecured HTTP, allowing potential interception.
Fix: Add the response header: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload
Evidence: HTTP Strict Transport Security
- 2
Incomplete Clickjacking ProtectionMedium
Why it matters: One page lacks X-Frame-Options, making it vulnerable to embedding in frames.
Fix: Add the response header: X-Frame-Options: DENY or SAMEORIGIN
Evidence: Clickjacking protection
- 3
Cookie Lacks Protective FlagsMedium
Why it matters: The cookie can be accessed via scripts or may be transmitted over unsecured HTTP.
Fix: Set the cookie with Secure, HttpOnly, and SameSite attributes.
Evidence: Cookie flags
- 4
Weak Content Security PolicyMedium
Why it matters: Allowing 'unsafe-inline' scripts exposes the site to script injection attacks.
Fix: Adjust the Content Security Policy to remove 'unsafe-inline' and define trusted sources.
Evidence: Content Security Policy
- 5
Third-Party Scripts Lack Subresource IntegrityLow
Why it matters: Running scripts from other domains without integrity checks could lead to unauthorized code execution.
Fix: Consider using Subresource Integrity, or if not supported, ensure they are trusted and make use of a CSP that restricts where scripts can come from.
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://trends.google.com/trends/ → no strict-transport-security
- https://trends.google.com/home → no strict-transport-security
- https://trends.google.com/tv/?rows=3&cols=4 → no strict-transport-security
- https://trends.google.com/trending → no strict-transport-security
- FoundClickjacking protectionMedium
3 of 4 HTML pages send 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://trends.google.com/tv/?rows=3&cols=4 → no x-frame-options
- FoundCookie flagsMedium
1 of 1 cookie are missing protective flags. Without HttpOnly a script can read the cookie; without Secure it travels over plain HTTP; without SameSite it is sent on cross-site requests.
- NID (set by https://trends.google.com/trends/) lacks Secure, SameSite
- NoteContent Security Policy
A Content-Security-Policy is set, but it allows inline or eval scripts ('unsafe-inline' / 'unsafe-eval'), which removes most of its protection against injected scripts.
- https://trends.google.com/trends/ → script-src 'report-sample' 'nonce-vswqW0hBdmIJTticPL9JdA' 'unsafe-inline';object-src 'none';base-uri 'self';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport;worker-src 'self', require-trusted-types-for 'script';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport
- https://trends.google.com/home → script-src 'report-sample' 'nonce-z065UEkUwjN1j40ZsmJrZA' 'unsafe-inline';object-src 'none';base-uri 'self';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport;worker-src 'self', require-trusted-types-for 'script';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport
- https://trends.google.com/tv/?rows=3&cols=4 → require-trusted-types-for 'script';report-uri /tv/_/TrendsTvUi/cspreport, script-src 'report-sample' 'nonce-v4OEre7e8GrXBJsyyws2qQ' 'unsafe-inline';object-src 'none';base-uri 'self';report-uri /tv/_/TrendsTvUi/cspreport;worker-src 'self'
- https://trends.google.com/trending → script-src 'report-sample' 'nonce-dR_9x8kyexazVeu_9F6UvQ' 'unsafe-inline';object-src 'none';base-uri 'self';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport;worker-src 'self', require-trusted-types-for 'script';report-uri /_/TrendsUi/cspreport
- 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.)
- www.gstatic.com (1 script tag)
- www.googletagmanager.com (1 script tag)
9 checks passed, 2 not applicable
- OKHTTPS
All 4 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.
- OKMIME sniffing protection
x-content-type-options is set on all 4 HTML pages.
- OKReferrer policy
A referrer policy is set through a <meta name="referrer"> tag.
- OKPermissions policy
permissions-policy is set on all 4 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.
- 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 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.
Sites scoring near trends.google.com
Their neighbours in the SEO rank table, which orders every scanned site by health score.
- normanviewdental.comDR 1879/100 · rank 1139 · 128 pages
- sanctuaryvethospital.comDR 679/100 · rank 1139 · 81 pages
- franklinphotographywa.comDR 1079/100 · rank 1139 · 21 pages
- www.advancedhealthphysio.comDR 1278/100 · rank 1224 · 76 pages
- rankmath.comDR 8878/100 · rank 1224 · 4,998 pages
- www.csqualita.itDR 1178/100 · rank 1224 · 440 pages
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 trends.google.com from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.
Own trends.google.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 trends.google.com. Removal needs no account and no proof of purchase.