Every other findability score is a black box. Ours is published.
Most tools hand you a number and ask you to trust it. We don't. This page shows you exactly how every score is built, every check we run, how your day-one baseline is sealed so it can't quietly change, and the honesty rules we never break. Read it, check our work, and hold us to it.
Three scores, and exactly how each one is built.
We roll everything we measure into three plain 0–100 scores. Here is the recipe for each — the parts that go in, and how much each part counts. These are the real weights we use, not a marketing simplification.
GFI — Google Findability Index
how easily people find you on Google today (0–100).
how much of your site Google has actually indexed and can show.
where you land on the Google results page for the questions your buyers ask.
whether Google shows its AI-written summary for those buyer questions.
SEO — Search Engine Optimization score
how well your website is built to be found and trusted (0–100).
the on-page basics: titles, headings, structured data, clean links.
whether your pages fully answer the question and show real expertise and trust.
whether each language version is set up correctly for search.
how fast and stable your pages feel to a real visitor.
a valid certificate, one clean address, no penalties or warnings.
how many trusted sites link to you — a vote of confidence Google counts.
AFI — AI Findability Index
how often AI assistants like ChatGPT mention you when people ask about what you do (0–100).
how often you're named at all across the AI answers we check.
how often your own site is cited as the source.
whether what's said about you is accurate and positive.
your share of the conversation versus the competitors named alongside you.
AFI carries a confidence band (±). It's an estimate that gets sharper as we run more checks each week — never a guaranteed ranking.
Weights shown are the live values used to compute your scores. When a part can't be measured yet, it's left out and the rest is re-balanced — never guessed.
Behind the three scores: every check we run, named.
Your scores aren't a vibe. They roll up from a fixed set of 62 checks across your Google and AI findability — the same set, every client, every audit. Here is the whole list, grouped, so you can see exactly what we look at. We measure all of it; we only ever charge to fix what's worth fixing.
Google findability checks
Can Google find and index your pages
- noindex directivesgood only intentional pages noindexedleak money pages noindexed
- robots.txt Disallowgood no buyer-relevant path blockedleak key routes disallowed
- Canonical conflictsgood self/correct canonicalleak points elsewhere
- Sitemap healthgood present, count = real pagesleak 0 / far below
- Coverage / crawl errorsgood high indexed-valid ratioleak discovered-not-indexed, soft 404s
- Orphan pages & internal link graphgood money pages linked, shallow depthleak orphans
- XML sitemap validity & lastmodgood valid XML, honest lastmodleak malformed/false
Where you land on the results page
- Position on buyer keywordsgood pos 1–10leak absent / >20
- SERP features (AIO/PAA/snippet)good client cited / owns snippetleak competitor cited
- Click curve / CTR vs expectedgood CTR ≥ benchmarkleak high impressions, low CTR
- AI Overview citation footprintgood cited in AIOs for money termsleak zero
- Share-of-voice / full footprintgood broad ranked footprintleak a few terms only
- Keyword cannibalizationgood one URL per intentleak competing URLs
- Striking-distancegood few near-page-1 gapsleak many pos 11–20
The on-page technical basics
- Title / meta / H1good one H1, title ~50–60, meta ~120–160leak H1=0/2, bad meta
- Structured data / schemagood valid Org/sameAs/Product/FAQleak missing/invalid
- Redirects & broken linksgood clean 200sleak chains, 404 internal links
- Alt-text coveragegood descriptive altleak many missing
- JS-render visibilitygood content server-renderedleak JS-only
- Mobile-first paritygood mobile = desktop content/linksleak hidden on mobile
- Deep schema validation & eligibilitygood no Rich-Results errors, eligibleleak invalid
Content depth, expertise, and trust
- Content depth vs intentgood fully answers the queryleak thin vs intent
- E-E-A-T signalsgood author/expertise/trust + citationsleak anonymous
- Thin / AI-spam contentgood original, usefulleak duplicative/auto-gen
- Content freshness / dateModifiedgood updated, honest dateModifiedleak stale/false
Multi-language setup
- hreflang reciprocity & x-defaultgood bidirectional, valid codes, x-defaultleak one-way/broken
- Locale targeting & paritygood each locale indexed, translatedleak duplicate/untranslated
- i18n routing & geo-redirectsgood crawler-safe locale redirectsleak cloaks content from bots
Speed and page experience
- Lab LCP / INP / CLSgood LCP ≤2.5s, INP ≤200ms, CLS ≤0.1leak slow/heavy
- Field CWV p75 (CrUX)good all Good at p75leak poor / no field data → field|lab
- Page weight & resource budgetgood lean payloadleak render-blocking, heavy 3rd-party
Security and site health
- HTTPS / HSTS / mixed contentgood valid cert, HSTS, no mixedleak http resources
- Host canonicalizationgood one host, single 301leak duplicate hosts/chains
- Manual Actions & Security Issuesgood noneleak penalty / hacked / spam
Authority and links from other sites
- Referring domains + backlinksgood healthy/relevantleak near-zero
- Domain rank (0–1000)good comparable/above competitorsleak far below
- Backlink gap vs competitorsgood parity/advantageleak competitors hold domains you lack
- Backlink toxicity / spamgood clean profileleak spam/PBN/toxic
- Anchor-text distributiongood natural mixleak over-optimized exact-match
- Unlinked brand mentions & PRgood mentions + reclaimable linksleak no presence
- Disavow statusgood current/cleanleak unmanaged toxic links
Local search presence
- Google Business Profile completenessgood complete, verifiedleak missing/sparse
- NAP consistencygood identical everywhereleak conflicting
- Reviews / ratingsgood volume/recency/responsesleak few/old
- Local-pack presencegood ranks in map packleak absent
- LocalBusiness schemagood valid + geoleak missing/invalid
AI findability checks
Whether AI answers mention and cite you
- Mention rategood surfaces across neutral Qsleak never named
- Citation rategood domain citedleak zero
- Sentiment / accuracygood accurate + positiveleak wrong (−1)
- Competitor share-of-voicegood meaningful shareleak competitors dominate
Whether AI engines can read your pages
- AI-crawler accessgood explicit allows for major AI botsleak blocked
- Server-render of answer passagesgood quotable text in server HTMLleak JS-only
- Expanded AI-crawler list & WAFgood full bot list allowed at robots + WAFleak blocked at edge
- llms.txt presence & validitygood valid /llms.txtleak absent/malformed
- Answer-passage render depthgood SSR passages on all answer pagesleak only home
Your footprint across AI surfaces
- Multi-engine footprintgood present across the probed AI answer enginesleak absent
- Google AIO citation footprintgood cited in AIOsleak zero (AI-axis view of A9)
- AI-referral traffic baselinegood AI-engine referrals capturedleak untracked
Whether you're a recognized entity
- Entity / sameAs consistency (on-site)good consistent name/identity/sameAsleak fragmented
- Knowledge Panel / knowledge-graphgood recognized entity / panelleak none
- Wikidata / Wikipedia entitygood accurate entityleak none/outdated
- Cross-web NAP / entity consistencygood identical entity across webleak off-site drift
Your day-one baseline is sealed, so no number can quietly change.
When your first full audit is done, we freeze it. Every part of it gets a unique fingerprint — a long code calculated from the exact numbers we recorded. Change a single digit later and the fingerprint no longer matches, so any edit is obvious. That's what lets us measure honest movement: your starting line can't drift to make us look better.
Written once
Your baseline is recorded once and never overwritten. If we ever re-baseline, it's a new, dated version that records what it replaced — never a silent edit of the original.
Tamper-evident fingerprint
A unique code is calculated from the exact numbers. If anything changes, the code changes too — so you can prove the baseline wasn't touched.
Every number traces to its source
Each part of the score is stamped against the actual measurement it came from, so any figure can be traced back to where it was read.
We ask the real AI answer engines the questions your buyers actually ask.
To measure your AI findability, we put your buyers' real questions to live AI answer engines and read what comes back — are you named, are you cited, what's said about you. We do this only through official, sanctioned access to those engines, never by scraping a consumer app or breaking anyone's terms.
Official access only
Every AI check runs through official, sanctioned channels. We never use scraped consumer screens, borrowed personal accounts, or back doors. If an engine can't be checked properly, it's left off your report and marked not measured — never faked.
Today we check these answer engines: ChatGPT, Claude. The list is data-driven — it grows as we connect more engines, and we will never name an engine on your report that we didn't actually check.
What we will never do with your numbers.
A published method is only worth something if the rules behind it are firm. These are ours, and they hold for every client, every report, forever.
We never promise rankings, traffic, or leads
We show you proof charted against your own baseline. We don't guarantee a position on Google, a number of visitors, or a flow of leads — anyone who does is guessing.
Every number is measured or marked not measurable
If we can't measure something yet, we say so plainly — it shows as not-yet-measurable, never as a fabricated figure to fill a gap.
Estimates carry their confidence
An estimate always travels with its confidence band, so you know how sure we are. We never present a banded estimate as a hard fact.
We follow GDPR and only measure what we're allowed to
We work within European data rules. We measure your public findability and the data you grant us access to — nothing more, and you can ask what we hold at any time.
The public standards behind our checks.
Our method isn't a private invention. Every check on this page maps to guidance the search and AI engines publish openly. These are the primary sources behind the scores — read them yourself and check our work against them.
- Google Search Central — Intro to structured data markup ↗
The official structured-data and rich-results guidance behind our on-page technical checks.
- schema.org — the structured-data vocabulary ↗
The open, cross-engine vocabulary our structured-data checks validate your pages against.
- Google Search Central — Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content (E-E-A-T) ↗
Google's own guidance on Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trust — the basis of our Content & E-E-A-T check.
- Google Search Central — Understanding Core Web Vitals and Google Search results ↗
The page-experience metrics (LCP, INP, CLS) our Core Web Vitals check measures.
- Google Search Central — AI features and your website ↗
Google's guidance on AI Overviews and AI Mode — the basis of our AI-Overview-presence check.
Request your baseline.
Send your site, market, and goal. We'll set your sealed day-one baseline using exactly the method on this page — then chart every move against it. No ranking guarantees, ever.