We Ran the Biggest SEO Tools Through Our Free Checker

We build an SEO checker, so we wanted to know: how do the websites of the best-known SEO tools score on it? We ran 10 of them through the same free check anyone can run on our home page. Same checks, same day, no special treatment for anyone, including us.

The leaderboard

Scanned 1 November 2026. Scores are out of 100 and cover each site's home page and its most important pages. Our autopilot runs this again regularly and updates this page.

What the big names miss

Even the best-resourced SEO teams leave things on the table. Here are the top items our checker flagged on each site.

neilpatel.com: 91/100

• No og:image, so shared links have no picture.
• The title is too short or will be cut off in results.
• Most images are JPEG or PNG.
• The server took over 0.8 seconds to start sending the page (measured from our servers).

sitechecker.pro: 88/100

• Scripts or stylesheets in the head hold back the first paint.
• Images without width and height make the page jump around as they load.
• Most images are JPEG or PNG.
• The title is too short or will be cut off in results.

seobility.net: 88/100

• The plain http:// address does not redirect to https:// with a permanent redirect.
• Scripts or stylesheets in the head hold back the first paint.
• Several pages share the same title.
• Some addresses in the sitemap redirect, return an error, or are set to noindex.

seositecheckup.com: 87/100

• Some images have no alt text, so search and screen readers cannot read them.
• The title is too short or will be cut off in results.
• Links on the site lead to pages that do not exist.
• Some addresses in the sitemap redirect, return an error, or are set to noindex.

ahrefs.com: 84/100

• Scripts or stylesheets in the head hold back the first paint.
• Some images have no alt text, so search and screen readers cannot read them.
• The title is too short or will be cut off in results.
• No structured data (JSON-LD), so search engines must guess what this page is.

woorank.com: 84/100

• The page has no H1, or several.
• Scripts or stylesheets in the head hold back the first paint.
• Some images have no alt text, so search and screen readers cannot read them.
• No og:image, so shared links have no picture.

semrush.com: 81/100

• No structured data (JSON-LD), so search engines must guess what this page is.
• Scripts or stylesheets in the head hold back the first paint.
• Some addresses in the sitemap redirect, return an error, or are set to noindex.
• Some images have no alt text, so search and screen readers cannot read them.

Patterns worth copying

• AI search is wide open. 6 of 8 sites let every AI crawler we test read them. They want to be cited by ChatGPT and Perplexity, and so should you.
• Speed is the common weak spot. Render-blocking files and heavy images showed up again and again. Fast pages are hard, even for experts.
• The basics still matter. Title lengths, image alt text and clean sitemaps were among the most common misses.

Why some sites weren't scored

moz.com and seoptimer.com refused our crawler. We never pretend to be a browser to get around a block, and we never give a score to a page we couldn't see.

Your turn

Want to know how your site compares? Run the same free check. It takes about ten seconds and needs no sign-up. Then put yourself side by side with your own competitors from your report.

Keep reading