Find out if AI answer engines can understand, trust, and recommend your firm
Audit AI checks SEO foundations, AEO readiness, GEO signals, trust evidence, schema clarity, service/location relevance, and competitor visibility for expertise-led firms.
Preview dashboard
Example dataTop issue preview
No service schema detected on key pages, reducing machine-readable service/entity clarity.
Competitor gap preview
2/3 sample competitors show stronger schema + FAQ coverage on service pages.
Professional Report includes 3-competitor comparison detail
What the audit covers
Dashboard-style scoring across technical, trust, conversion, and competitor visibility signals for professional service firms.
AI Visibility Summary
72
/100
Overall machine-readable visibility is workable but not yet strong enough for consistent recommendation confidence.
Action: Resolve highest-impact trust and schema gaps first, then re-test.
SEO Foundations
78
/100
Core structure is mostly solid, but service intent can be clearer in headings and metadata.
Action: Tighten title/H2 alignment on service-led pages.
Answer Engine Readiness
66
/100
Some content is extractable, but question-led answers and concise service explanations are uneven.
Action: Add FAQ-style answers to high-intent service sections.
Generative Search / GEO Signals
71
/100
Entity context exists, though service-to-location intent is not surfaced consistently.
Action: Strengthen service + location language on key entry pages.
Schema & Machine Readability
38
/100
Schema coverage is weak and leaves AI systems to infer too much of the commercial profile.
Action: Implement Organization + professional service schema on priority pages.
Firm / Entity Clarity
74
/100
Firm identity is present, but structured entity consistency across pages can be improved.
Action: Standardise service/entity naming and location references.
Trust & Proof Signals
67
/100
Trust indicators are visible in places but not consistently connected to core service pages.
Action: Surface proof snippets and process signals where buyers decide.
Professional Expertise Signals
63
/100
Signals of expertise are present but could be clearer for buyer and AI confidence.
Action: Strengthen visible expertise context and role-led profile detail.
Local & Service Relevance
70
/100
Service relevance is adequate, with room to sharpen location-aware service intent.
Action: Create clearer service-location blocks and internal links.
Content Quality & Structure
69
/100
Coverage exists but depth and heading hierarchy are uneven on service-led pages.
Action: Restructure service pages with clearer sections and buyer guidance.
Conversion / Enquiry Readiness
65
/100
Contact pathways are available, but CTAs are not consistently tied to service intent.
Action: Add specific next-step CTAs on each core service section.
Core Web Vitals & Speed
58
/100
Performance can hold back mobile enquiry flow and answer-engine confidence.
Action: Prioritise mobile LCP and TBT improvements on primary landing pages.
Links, Images & Accessibility
76
/100
Internal linking and media hygiene are generally good, with targeted polish still needed.
Action: Add intent-led internal links from homepage to service pages.
Competitor Visibility Comparison
61
/100
Competitor snapshots suggest rivals may communicate schema and service trust more clearly.
Action: Use 3-competitor benchmarking to prioritise the highest leverage gaps.
How Audit AI analyses your site
Audit AI reads your website from two perspectives: a potential client deciding whether to enquire, and an AI answer system deciding whether it can confidently reference your firm.
- What does the firm do, and which services are clearly explained?
- Who does the firm serve, and where does it operate?
- Can AI systems extract clear answers from key pages?
- Are people, credentials, reviews, and trust signals visible?
- Are contact details, service pathways, and enquiry next steps clear?
- Is schema helping machine-readable understanding or leaving inference gaps?
Core Web Vitals and speed context
Speed issues affect more than rankings. They can reduce enquiry intent, increase bounce risk, and weaken AI/search confidence in content quality and user experience.
LCP
3.9sNeeds work
Slow first impression can reduce enquiry momentum on mobile.
FCP
2.1sGood
Initial content appears reasonably quickly for first-time visitors.
CLS
0.18Needs work
Layout movement can create friction when users try to act quickly.
TBT / INP
380msWeak
Interaction delay can hurt form completion and call-to-action clicks.
See report components in action
Demo widgets preview how Audit AI presents score interpretation, evidence, actions, and competitor context.
Demo data only for product preview.
Score Overview
Overall AI Visibility
72
/100
Good foundation with clear schema and trust gaps.
SEO
78
/100
Technical foundations are mostly sound.
AEO
66
/100
Answer extraction signals need stronger structure.
GEO
71
/100
Entity clarity is visible but uneven across pages.
Schema / Entity Warning
Machine-readable service schema is weak or not detected on key pages.
Impact: AI systems may infer services and expertise instead of confirming them with structured evidence.
Recommended: add Organization + AccountingService/LegalService/ProfessionalService schema based on firm type.
Top 3 Priority Actions
Priority 1
Implement Organization + professional service schema on homepage and service page.
Priority 2
Restructure service page sections for tax, bookkeeping, payroll, accounts, audit, and advisory intent.
Priority 3
Add FAQ block and FAQPage schema to improve answer extraction for buyer questions.
Trust Signal Summary
Named professional signals: multiple detected
About and contact pages: detected
Testimonials/proof signals: present but uneven
Professional memberships: partial visibility
Competitor Comparison Preview
Sample firm: 72 overall
Competitor range: 68-79 overall
Largest gap: schema + FAQ visibility
Secondary gap: mobile LCP on service pages
Affected Pages Mini Table
| Page | Page type | Issue | Severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| / | homepage | No professional service schema | High |
| /what-can-we-do-for-you | service | Mixed service structure | High |
| /testimonials | proof | Process/proof context is uneven | Medium |
Compare your firm against 3 competitors
Professional Reports include deterministic homepage benchmarking against up to 3 competitors to show where your visibility profile is leading or lagging.
- AI visibility score by competitor homepage
- Schema and entity clarity differences
- Service-page clarity and answer readiness
- Local intent and location relevance signals
- Trust/proof signal strength
- Core Web Vitals and speed gaps
- Conversion readiness and priority-gap count
Competitor benchmarking works on provided competitor domains and remains homepage-only for reliability.
What to do next
Step 1
Run free snapshot
Get a fast, structured baseline of SEO, AEO, GEO, trust, and schema signals.
Step 2
Review priority issues
Use page-specific evidence and top actions to identify the biggest commercial gaps.
Step 3
Compare against competitors
Benchmark your homepage visibility profile against up to 3 competitors.
Step 4
Fix and re-test
Implement improvements, then re-run the audit to validate progress.
Sample report preview
Explore a dashboard-style demo report before you run your own audit.
Example: Manchester Accountancy Firm
Fictional demo dataFree Snapshot vs Professional Report
Clear packaging for buyers who want immediate direction now and deeper implementation detail next.
Free Snapshot
Available nowGet a representative AI visibility snapshot with SEO, AEO, and GEO scoring plus immediate high-priority fixes.
- 1 website audit
- Representative page sample
- SEO/AEO/GEO summary scores
- Top priority fixes
Professional Report
Coming soonA deeper multi-page commercial report with stronger evidence, implementation outputs, and premium presentation.
- Deeper multi-page analysis
- Schema/entity recommendations
- Implementation checklist
- Premium report presentation
- Competitor comparison where available