Technical SEO Audits
What we've learned so far
Technical SEO decides whether the work you have already paid for can be found. Content, product pages and site structure are worth nothing if crawlers cannot reach them, cannot render them, or are given three versions of the same page and pick the wrong one. An audit converts existing assets into visibility rather than creating new assets, which is why it is usually the cheapest intervention available.
The job changed in the last two years and most audits have not caught up. Around 58 percent of US searches now end without a click, and pages that previously ranked in the top three have seen roughly 30 percent organic declines on queries where AI summaries appear. At the same time automated traffic now exceeds human traffic on the web, and the machines reading your site are less forgiving than Google: a large share of assistant crawler visits fetch plain HTML with no JavaScript, so anything rendered client-side is simply absent. If a model cannot read your pricing page it will quote a third party instead, and that third party is frequently out of date.
Every crawler will hand you hundreds of issues for free, which is precisely why the list is not the service. We rank findings against the URLs that actually carry traffic and revenue, and we state which items to ignore, because an audit without that instruction becomes a backlog nobody finishes. We also audit for both readers, the crawler and the model, and are explicit about which recommendation serves which, since they occasionally conflict. We will also tell you which tactics are theatre. Evidence suggests some of the currently fashionable ones, llms.txt among them, are almost never fetched.
What this can involve
Technical SEO Audit
Site Speed Optimisation
Core Web Vitals Audit
Core Web Vitals Optimisation
How we work
Understand the product first
What the business sells, which pages carry the money, and which searches are worth winning. Without that, an audit is a list of issues with no way to rank them.
Crawl the site as a search engine would
What gets found, what gets ignored, what redirects into a loop, and which pages are competing with each other for the same query.
Check what is actually indexed
Search Console against the crawl, to see the gap between the pages you think are in the index and the ones that are.
Review structure and markup
Internal linking, site architecture, structured data and how far the commercially important pages sit from the homepage.
Hand over a ranked list
What to fix, in order of effect on revenue rather than severity score, with enough detail that a developer can act without another meeting.
Where this isn't the right fit
If the site is fundamentally sound and the problem is that nobody has written anything worth ranking, an audit will confirm that and change nothing. Technical work removes obstacles. It does not create demand, and no amount of it will rank a page that answers a question nobody is asking.
If you have already run a crawl and hold a report nobody acted on, you do not need another one. What you need is someone to do the work, and that is a different conversation. And if the site is about to be rebuilt or replatformed, wait. Audit the new one, or better, build the structure correctly during the migration rather than diagnosing it afterwards.

