Skip to main content

Report

The whole picture, in one document, with an order of operations

Eleven possible modules, one prioritised list, and an explicit answer to the question that matters: given everything we found, what should you do first?

At a glance

Scope
Every module relevant to your site, agreed before work begins
Review
Every interpretation checked by a person before delivery
Output
Executive summary, scores, findings, opportunities, roadmap
Follow-up
A conversation to work through the findings and the sequence

Most organisations arrive with a specific question — why is traffic down, why do we not rank, should we worry about AI — and most of those questions turn out to have an answer somewhere other than where they were pointed.

A traffic decline traced to a migration. A ranking problem that is really a positioning problem. A GEO question whose answer is that the site’s basic entity signals are missing. Assessing everything at once is not thoroughness for its own sake; it is the only way to find causes that sit outside the discipline where the symptom appeared.

Contents

What the report contains

Only the modules that ran appear. The structure is consistent so that a reader learns it once.

Executive summary

  • Overall health in plain language
  • The five strongest and five weakest aspects
  • The single most urgent issue
  • The highest-value opportunity
  • Implementation complexity and confidence

Scores

  • An overall score with its explanation
  • One score per module, each with what it reflects
  • A clear statement of what scores are not
  • Comparable between assessments over time

Search and generative

  • SEO findings across discovery, indexation and page signals
  • GEO findings across entity, service and attribution clarity
  • Where the two reinforce or contradict each other
  • Structured data assessed for accuracy, not just presence

Content and brand

  • Coverage gaps against buyer questions
  • Quality assessed against purpose rather than length
  • Consolidation and removal candidates
  • Proposition clarity and trust foundations

Technical and infrastructure

  • Crawling, indexation, rendering, architecture and delivery
  • Performance measured for mobile and desktop
  • Email authentication and DNS configuration where selected
  • Passive security posture where selected

Direction

  • Competitor context where the module applies
  • Growth opportunities, separated from defects
  • A ninety-day roadmap with the reasoning for its order
  • Honest statement of what could not be established

A traffic problem is rarely a traffic problem. Assessing everything at once is how you find the cause that sits outside the discipline where the symptom appeared.

Process

How the report is produced

  1. Scope and context

    A conversation about what the business wants from search, which services are profitable, which competitors matter and what constraints exist. This determines which modules run and how findings are weighted.

  2. Automated assessment

    The full pipeline against your site, with a broader crawl than the public snapshot performs. Deterministic checks establish the facts before any interpretation begins.

  3. Verification where relevant

    Where infrastructure, email or exposure modules are in scope, domain ownership is demonstrated so that findings can include the specific detail withheld from public output.

  4. Human review

    Every interpretation is checked against the evidence. Findings that do not survive scrutiny are removed. Findings the automation ranked poorly are reordered against what actually matters for your business.

  5. Sequencing

    The roadmap is built from dependency and return rather than from severity alone. An easy fix that unlocks three others comes before a difficult one with a larger isolated effect.

  6. Delivery and discussion

    The report, followed by a conversation to work through it. The discussion frequently changes the sequence, because you know things about your constraints that the assessment cannot.

Frequently asked questions

How is this different from the free snapshot?
The snapshot runs the same checks and shows a subset of what they produce. This adds every finding, human review of every interpretation, prioritisation against your commercial position, competitor context, the opportunities section, the roadmap, and verified-level detail where ownership has been demonstrated.
Do we need every module?
No, and the scope is agreed before the work starts. Email health matters enormously to some organisations and barely at all to others. A report covering five modules is shorter, not thinner, and is priced accordingly.
What do you need from us?
The website address and a conversation about what the business actually wants from search — which searches matter, which services are profitable, what constraints exist. Search Console and analytics access improve the assessment considerably where you can provide them, and the work proceeds without them where you cannot.
Will our developers be able to work from it?
The technical findings are specific enough to scope from, and include what to verify afterwards. They stop short of writing the implementation, because the right approach depends on your platform and codebase. Where implementation support is wanted, that is a separate engagement.
How long is it valid for?
A report describes what was observable when it was produced. Technical findings remain accurate until somebody changes something. Competitive and content findings age faster, because competitors move. Most organisations find an annual reassessment sensible, with a quarterly cycle where the market is contested.

Start with the free snapshot

It uses the same pipeline and gives you a reasonable sense of what a full assessment would surface, at no cost and in about a minute.