This is the only tool in the set that follows links instead of examining a single URL, and that changes what it can see. A page-level audit tells you a title is too short. A crawl tells you that four hundred pages share the same title because a template generates it — which is a completely different problem with a completely different fix. The scores here are consequently lower and more honest: it is easy to have one good page and hard to have a good site.
Here is where that sits. The median is 67/100, which ranks it 11 of the 25 measures in this dataset. The middle half of results falls between 30 and 85 — a band 55 points wide. That is wide: sites genuinely diverge here, which is to say getting ahead is still possible.
How the scores are distributed
An average on its own misleads. The chart below splits all 1,445 scans into five score bands, totalling 100%. Scores collect at both ends and hollow out in the middle — the mark of a check that has either been done or not done at all, with little partial credit in between.
- 0–19
- 20–39
- 40–59
- 60–79
- 80–100
| Score band | Site Crawl |
|---|---|
| 0–19 | 17% · 242 |
| 20–39 | 13% · 192 |
| 40–59 | 12% · 174 |
| 60–79 | 23% · 335 |
| 80–100 | 35% · 502 |
| Total runs | 1,445 |
The grade mix
The same data as letters: A+ 95–100, A 85–94, B 75–84, C 65–74, D 50–64 and F below 50.
Where your score stands
Compare this score against your own previous crawls rather than against other sites. The number depends partly on how many pages were reached, and a large site will almost always surface more defects than a small one simply because it has more surface. What matters is the direction of travel and the ratio of affected pages, both of which are in the detail below.
| Tool | 10th | 25th | Median | 75th | 90th | Mean | Lowest | Highest |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site Crawl | 0 | 30 | 67 | 85 | 95 | 57 | 0 | 100 |
How to read it: 30 is bottom-quartile, 67 is a typical page, 85 starts the upper quartile and 95 or above is the top 10%. These thresholds apply to this tool only.
The checks that fail most
Nearly every failure here is a template failure wearing a page-level disguise. A missing H1 on one page is an oversight; a missing H1 on every page in a section is a layout file. That is the whole value of crawling rather than sampling — the shape of the failure tells you where to make the change.
| Check | Did not pass | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Titles are long enough (≥30) | 73% | Partial |
| Images have ALT text | 69% | Partial |
| Pages use H2 subheadings | 66% | Partial |
| Every page has an H1 | 56% | Hard fail |
| All pages have a meta description | 54% | Partial |
| No broken outbound links | 43% | Hard fail |
| No thin-content pages (≥250w) | 34% | Partial |
| Single H1 per page | 26% | Partial |
| All pages indexable | 22% | Hard fail |
| All pages have a title | 12% | Hard fail |
| No redirected links | 3% | Partial |
“Hard fail” means the check’s full weighting is lost; “partial” means only part of the score is. Rates are the share of scans in which the check ran and did not pass.
The weakest areas
This tool groups its checks into categories. The chart below shows how often each category was the lowest-scoring one in a scan — which area is most often the weak link. It is not the average score in that category; it is how often it came last.
“Media & links” was the weakest area in 56% of scans.
What to fix first
Sort by the number of pages affected, not by severity, and fix the template-level problems first. One edit to a layout file will usually close more failing checks than a week of editing individual pages, and it prevents the same defect from being reintroduced on every page published afterwards.
A typical scan passes 6.4 of 11 checks and leaves 4.6 open items behind. What drags a score down is usually not one catastrophe but accumulated small omissions.
Run the Technical Site Audit (Crawler) on your own page
Month by month
The figures on this page are replaced at every refresh. At the end of each month a permanent edition is published for that month and never edited again — which is the only reason this series can be compared at all. One edition has been published so far; when the second lands this section will set the two months side by side.
| Edition | Median | vs. previous | Scored 80+ | Issues/run | Runs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| August 2026 | 67 | baseline | 35% | 4.6 | 1,445 |
Frequently asked questions
How many pages does the crawler visit?
It follows internal links outward from the URL you give it, up to a bounded limit, staying on the same host and skipping anything the robots rules disallow. That means the result describes the part of the site reachable from where you started — if a section is only linked from a sitemap, start the crawl there instead.
Why do broken links matter more on a crawl than on a single page?
Because a broken link on one page is an inconvenience, while a broken link in a shared navigation or footer is on every page at once. The crawl is what tells the two apart. Broken outbound links also decay silently over time: nothing on your side changed, the destination simply stopped existing.
Does this replace a log-file or index-coverage analysis?
No. A crawl shows what a crawler could reach and what it would find there; it cannot tell you what Google actually fetched, indexed or ignored. Use this to find structural defects, and Search Console to find out which pages the search engine has an opinion about.
What is a good score on the Technical Site Audit (Crawler)?
In this dataset the median is 67/100, so scoring 67 puts you exactly in the middle. 85 is the start of the upper quartile and 95 or above is the top 10%; below 30 is the bottom quarter. Those thresholds are specific to this tool — the 25 measures in this dataset have very different medians, so 70 here and 70 elsewhere do not mean the same thing.
Which check fails most often on the Technical Site Audit (Crawler)?
“Titles are long enough (≥30)”, which did not pass in 73% of scans. The costliest failures, though, are the ones scored as hard fails — this tool has 4, the most common being “Every page has an H1” at 56%.
Questions that govern the whole series — how the sample is collected, how sites are anonymized, how often the figures are refreshed — are answered in the methodology on the hub.
Using this data
The figures, tables and charts on this page are free to reuse under CC BY 4.0; the only condition is a link back to this page. Suggested citation: SeoMods — Technical Site Audit (Crawler) benchmarks, 2 September 2026, https://seomods.com/seo-score-benchmarks/site-audit. If you need to cite by date, use the August 2026 edition instead: this page changes at every refresh and that one never does.