Scanned sites / www.beautyrewind.ca / 2026-09-15-1257

www.beautyrewind.ca scan from 2026-09-15 12:57:59 UTC DR 13

A newer scan exists. See the latest report for www.beautyrewind.ca.

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

Scan 2026-09-15-1257

Scanned 2026-09-15 12:57:59 UTC, finished 2026-09-15 13:29:25 UTC. Found with openstreetmap overpass

Site: https://www.beautyrewind.ca/

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

82/ 100Good

On September 15, 2026 the Site Spider crawled 155 pages and 897 assets of www.beautyrewind.ca, starting from https://www.beautyrewind.ca/. It scored 82 out of 100, a good result. 9 of 27 checks found something to fix, led by heavy assets (133), meta descriptions (67), title tags (53); 9 checks passed. Most of the points went to heavy assets (−6), meta descriptions (−3.7), title tags (−3.6). 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: Medium2 medium, 2 low and 2 info findings. See the security findings ↓

Pages crawled
155
Assets fetched
897
Status
Completed
Checks with issues
9 of 27
CoverageComplete crawl

1,052 of 1,058 discovered URLs were fetched, 1 blocked by robots.txt. The crawl reached everything it found. HTML only: nothing here ran JavaScript. 98 link destinations on other sites were checked.

  • Title tags53 issues
    53 of 143 pages have title issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −3.6 points
  • Meta descriptions67 issues
    67 of 143 pages have meta description issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −3.7 points
  • Headings3 issues
    3 of 143 pages have heading issues. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
    −0.1 points
  • Broken linksOK
    0 internal links point at 0 broken URLs.
  • Links to other sites12 issues
    12 destinations answered with an error, 44 could not be determined (timeouts, rate limits or refusals), of 95 destinations checked.
    −3.2 points
  • Redirects8 issues
    10 redirecting URLs, 0 of them chained.
    −0.2 points
  • Non-200 responses13 noted
    13 URLs did not return a 2xx response. 9 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 143 indexable pages have indexability warnings. 3 pages noindex by design. 2 noindex pages are listed in the sitemap, which asks search engines both to visit and to ignore them.
    −0.1 points
  • Image alt textOK
    0 of 1909 image references have no alt attribute. 1119 use an empty alt (decorative), which is fine.
  • Heavy assets133 issues
    133 assets larger than 500 KB among 897 fetched assets.
    −6 points
  • Orphan pages20 issues
    20 pages have no internal links pointing at them.
    −0.5 points
  • Sitemap coverage27 issues
    9 sitemaps listing 140 URLs: 6 crawled pages missing, 1 listed URL broken or redirecting, 18 reachable only via the sitemap.
    −1.1 points
  • Internal link counts7 noted
    Internal link counts for 146 pages; 7 worth a look.
  • Thin contentOK
    0 of 143 pages have fewer than 200 words. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Duplicate contentOK
    0 groups of pages with identical HTML.
  • URL formatOK
    All 155 page URLs are plain lowercase addresses without parameters.
  • Canonicals1 noted
    1 of 146 pages have a canonical worth checking.
  • Robots directives146 noted
    146 pages carry a robots directive; 0 carry none.
  • Anchor text14 noted
    14 destinations are linked without useful anchor text, or with nofollow.
  • Title and heading structure27 noted
    27 of 143 pages could use the title, heading and snippet space better. 3 noindex or canonicalized pages excluded.
  • Image weight and alt length89 noted
    88 images over 100 KB; 1 with alt text over 100 characters.
  • Response anomalies7 noted
    7 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 146 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; 15 response headers recorded across 1052 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 146 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 44 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

2346 sites, median 79%, average 78%

www.beautyrewind.ca scores 82%, higher than 59% of the 2346 scanned sites. See the full ranking.

0581150%: 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%: 4 sites52%: 10 sites53%: 7 sites54%: 8 sites55%: 10 sites56%: 8 sites57%: 12 sites58%: 17 sites59%: 9 sites60%: 16 sites61%: 12 sites62%: 20 sites63%: 27 sites64%: 22 sites65%: 32 sites66%: 35 sites67%: 35 sites68%: 34 sites69%: 47 sites70%: 44 sites71%: 69 sites72%: 71 sites73%: 70 sites74%: 68 sites75%: 72 sites76%: 87 sites77%: 92 sites78%: 107 sites79%: 84 sites80%: 108 sites81%: 105 sites82%: 115 sites83%: 102 sites84%: 106 sites85%: 88 sites86%: 71 sites87%: 74 sites88%: 59 sites89%: 65 sites90%: 35 sites91%: 47 sites92%: 38 sites93%: 24 sites94%: 17 sites95%: 12 sites96%: 12 sites97%: 12 sites98%: 5 sites99%: 2 sites100%: 68 sites82% 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 has a good health score, but there are several areas needing improvement, particularly with redirects and title/meta description issues. Addressing these will enhance SEO visibility.

  1. 1

    Fix Redirects

    Why: 10 redirecting URLs can confuse search engines and users.

    How: Update your site to use direct links where possible to remove unnecessary redirects.

    Checks: redirects

  2. 2

    Resolve Non-200 Responses

    Why: 13 URLs not returning 2xx responses hinder user access and SEO.

    How: Check the status of these URLs and make them accessible or remove them.

    Checks: status-codes

  3. 3

    Improve Title Tags

    Why: 53 pages with title issues affect SEO rankings and click-through rates.

    How: Revise the titles to be within optimal length (30-60 characters) and relevant to page content.

    Checks: titles

  4. 4

    Revise Meta Descriptions

    Why: 54 pages have meta description issues, reducing click appeal.

    How: Edit meta descriptions to be concise (under 160 characters) and engaging, encouraging clicks.

    Checks: meta-descriptions

  5. 5

    Address Heading Issues

    Why: 3 pages with multiple H1s can confuse search engines about the main topic.

    How: Ensure each page has a single H1 tag and use H2s for subsections appropriately.

    Checks: headings

  6. 6

    Update Sitemap Coverage

    Why: 6 crawled pages missing in sitemap affects indexing by search engines.

    How: Add these missing pages to your sitemap and ensure sitemaps reflect current site structure.

    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 website beautyrewind.ca lacks important security headers that could protect user data and privacy. Key areas of concern include the absence of HTTP Strict Transport Security and Clickjacking protection, which could allow for potential attacks. Addressing these issues will enhance your site's security.

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

    Missing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)Medium

    Why it matters: Without HSTS, visitors can be intercepted on initial requests using HTTP.

    Fix: Add the header: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload

    Evidence: HTTP Strict Transport Security

  2. 2

    Missing Clickjacking ProtectionMedium

    Why it matters: Lack of X-Frame-Options allows embedding in frames, increasing risks of clickjacking.

    Fix: Add the header: X-Frame-Options: DENY or Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors 'none'

    Evidence: Clickjacking protection

  3. 3

    Missing Referrer PolicyLow

    Why it matters: No referrer-policy exposes full page URLs to external sites when users click links.

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

    Evidence: Referrer policy

  4. 4

    Third-party Scripts without Subresource IntegrityLow

    Why it matters: Using scripts without integrity checks increases risk if these external resources are compromised.

    Fix: Consider implementing Subresource Integrity (SRI) for third-party scripts.

    Evidence: Third-party scripts

  5. 5

    Missing Permissions PolicyInfo

    Why it matters: Absence of a permissions-policy leaves all browser features enabled that could be exploited.

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

    Evidence: Permissions policy

  6. 6

    Sensitive Paths Listed in Robots.txtInfo

    Why it matters: Private paths in robots.txt can guide attackers to probe sensitive areas.

    Fix: Implement proper access controls for /wp-admin/ instead of relying on robots.txt.

    Evidence: Sensitive paths in robots.txt

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://www.beautyrewind.ca/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/about/patient-financing/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/skincare/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/skinmedica/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/vivier/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/zo-skin-health/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/under-eye-fillers/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/cosmetic-injectable-fillers/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/dermal-fillers-edmonton/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lip-fillers-edmonton/ → no strict-transport-security
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lash-enhancement-treatment/ → no strict-transport-security
  • FoundClickjacking protectionMedium

    2 of 146 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://www.beautyrewind.ca/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/about/patient-financing/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/skincare/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/skinmedica/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/vivier/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/zo-skin-health/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/under-eye-fillers/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/cosmetic-injectable-fillers/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/dermal-fillers-edmonton/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lip-fillers-edmonton/ → no x-frame-options
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lash-enhancement-treatment/ → no x-frame-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://www.beautyrewind.ca/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/about/patient-financing/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/skincare/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/skinmedica/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/vivier/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/zo-skin-health/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/under-eye-fillers/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/cosmetic-injectable-fillers/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/dermal-fillers-edmonton/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lip-fillers-edmonton/ → no referrer-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lash-enhancement-treatment/ → 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://www.beautyrewind.ca/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/about/patient-financing/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/skincare/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/skinmedica/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/vivier/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/product-tag/zo-skin-health/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/under-eye-fillers/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/cosmetic-injectable-fillers/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/dermal-fillers-edmonton/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lip-fillers-edmonton/ → no permissions-policy
    • https://www.beautyrewind.ca/our-services/for-the-face/lash-enhancement-treatment/ → no permissions-policy
  • 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.)

    • static.klaviyo.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/
8 checks passed, 2 not applicable
  • OKHTTPS

    All 146 crawled pages were served over HTTPS.

  • OKContent Security Policy

    A Content-Security-Policy is set on 2 of 146 pages.

  • OKMIME sniffing protection

    x-content-type-options is set on all 146 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.

  • OKVulnerable JavaScript libraries

    2 library versions 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.

  • Not applicableCookie flags

    The crawl set no cookies, so there are no cookie flags to check.

  • Not applicableForms over HTTPS

    No forms were found on the sampled pages.

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 www.beautyrewind.ca

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 www.beautyrewind.ca from its pages as published, the way a search engine does. It shows summary figures only.

Own www.beautyrewind.ca?

  • 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 www.beautyrewind.ca. Removal needs no account and no proof of purchase.