SEO, GEO, Accessibility, Security & Performance Features: What We Measure and Report

SEO-GEO combines traditional search engine optimization checks with Generative Engine Optimization (GEO / AI readiness), WCAG-oriented accessibility checks, a passive security review and a dedicated Performance pillar — so you can improve search health, machine-readability signals, basic HTML accessibility, hardening configuration and speed, all from one crawl.

Key takeaways

· 100+ checks across technical SEO, on-page, GEO, accessibility, security and performance.
· Five scores — SEO (search engines), GEO / AI readiness (machine-readability signals), WCAG (accessibility), Security and Performance — in one report.
· Actionable list of issues with severity and recommendations.
· See methodology for how we calculate scores and how it works for the process.

SEO analysis features: what we check

Our SEO module evaluates everything that affects how search engines crawl, index, and rank your site.

Technical SEO

Indexability — robots.txt, meta robots, canonical tags, and redirects.
XML sitemap — presence, validity, and coverage.
Core Web Vitals — LCP, INP, CLS where measurable.
Mobile-friendliness — viewport, tap targets, and mobile usability signals.
HTTPS and security — SSL and basic security headers.
Structured data — Schema.org markup validation and errors.

On-page and content

Title and meta description — length, uniqueness, and relevance.
Headings — H1 presence, hierarchy, and keyword usage.
Content quality — length, readability, and topical signals.
Internal linking — anchor text and link structure.

AI readiness (GEO) features

AI readiness scores technical and content signals for machine readability — structure, authority, citation-friendly markup and crawler access. It does not measure live visibility or ranking inside ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini or similar systems.

AI readability — clear structure, definitions, and answer-style content.
E-E-A-T signals — experience, expertise, authoritativeness, trust (author, dates, sources).
Citation-friendly markup — Schema.org, clear facts, and source attribution.
Content clarity — concise answers, lists, and scannable format.

The scan evaluates technical and content signals that may affect how machine systems can understand and process a website. It does not measure actual visibility or ranking inside AI search systems.

For details on how we weight and score these, see our methodology.

Accessibility (WCAG-oriented) features

From v2.0, every audit includes a WCAG-oriented accessibility branch aligned with the POUR principles (Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust), based on static HTML analysis. It does not certify WCAG compliance or that a site is fully accessible.

Perceivable — alt text, landmarks and page structure for screen readers.
Operable — skip links, link purpose and keyboard-friendly markup.
Understandable — form labels, language attribute and heading hierarchy.
Robust — valid ARIA, unique IDs and table headers.

Security features (passive — not a pentest)

The Security branch is a passive, static audit of response headers, the returned HTML and a few read-only probes. It never injects payloads or runs active penetration testing, so it is safe to run on any site you own or are auditing. The score is weighted Transport 30% + Headers 30% + Content 25% + Exposure 15%.

Transport — HTTPS, HTTP→HTTPS redirect, HSTS and mixed-content references.
Headers — Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy and CORS.
Content — forms over HTTP, tabnabbing, iframe sandboxing, Subresource Integrity, risky inline scripts and known outdated JS libraries.
Exposure — cookie flags (Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite), server/framework version disclosure, security.txt and accidentally exposed files.

A good passive score is not a guarantee of security — see the security methodology for scope and limitations.

Performance features (new in v2.2)

The Performance branch is a dedicated speed audit. Core Web Vitals (LCP, INP, CLS) remain Google's ranking signals; we add the diagnostics that usually explain a failed vital. The score is weighted Core Web Vitals 40% + Loading 25% + Delivery 20% + Payload 15%.

Core Web Vitals — lab Lighthouse LCP/INP/CLS plus CrUX field data when Google has enough real-user samples.
Loading — TTFB (800ms good), HTML download time, FCP, Speed Index and Total Blocking Time.
Delivery — compression, cache headers, HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 hints and CDN fingerprints.
Payload — modern images, render-blocking scripts/CSS, third-party tags, resource hints and font-display.

See the performance methodology for thresholds, and the v2.2 product article for what changed.

Scoring and report output

Each audit produces five scores and a detailed issue list, plus a combined score (the average of the five pillars). Severity levels help you prioritize: fix critical items first, then warnings, then informational suggestions.

Output	What it means
SEO score	A–F grade and 0–100; technical + on-page + content signals for search engines.
GEO score	A–F grade and 0–100; structure, E-E-A-T, and citation readiness for AI.
WCAG-oriented score	A–F grade and 0–100; static HTML checks across Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust — not a full WCAG conformance audit.
Security score	A–F grade and 0–100; passive transport, headers, content and exposure hardening.
Performance score	A–F grade and 0–100; Core Web Vitals, loading diagnostics, delivery and payload.
Critical	Issues that strongly affect score and should be fixed first.
Warning	Important but less severe; fix after critical items.
Info	Suggestions and best practices; lower impact on score.

To see the flow from URL to report, read how it works. For typical users and outcomes, see use cases. To compare with other tools, see SEO-GEO vs Ahrefs, SEMrush, Screaming Frog.