SEO auditový framework, který používáme na každém projektu

Every Empirium engagement starts with an SEO audit. Not a generic "your site needs improvement" report — a structured, scored assessment that identifies exactly what's broken, how much it costs you in lost traffic, and what to fix first.

Most SEO audits are either too shallow (run Lighthouse once, generate a PDF) or too broad (200-page report covering everything, actionable on nothing). Our framework is designed to be comprehensive enough to catch real issues and prioritized enough to guide implementation.

Here's the complete framework with scoring criteria, so you can run it yourself.

The Four Audit Pillars

We evaluate every site across four pillars, each weighted based on the site's maturity and goals:

Pillar	Weight (New Site)	Weight (Established Site)	Focus
Technical SEO	35%	25%	Can Google access and understand your site?
On-Page SEO	30%	25%	Is your content optimized for target queries?
Off-Page SEO	15%	25%	Does your site have authority and trust signals?
Content	20%	25%	Is your content comprehensive and valuable?

New sites need heavier technical weighting because fundamental crawling and indexing issues block everything else. Established sites have usually solved basic technical issues and need to focus more on content quality and authority.

Scoring Methodology

Each audit item is scored on a 3-point scale:

• Pass (3 points): Meets or exceeds best practice
• Warning (2 points): Functional but suboptimal — should be improved
• Fail (1 point): Actively hurting SEO — fix immediately

The total score is expressed as a percentage of the maximum possible points, weighted by pillar.

Technical Audit Checklist

Crawlability

Item	Pass Criteria	Fail Criteria	Tool
Robots.txt	Present, not blocking important content	Blocking CSS/JS, or blocking sections that should be indexed	Screaming Frog, manual review
XML sitemap	Present, all URLs return 200, accurate lastmod	Missing, contains 404s/redirects, stale dates	Screaming Frog, sitemap guide
Crawl errors	<1% of URLs return 4xx/5xx	>5% error rate	Search Console Coverage
Redirect chains	Zero chains >2 hops	Chains >3 hops exist	Screaming Frog
Crawl budget	Server responds <300ms, no crawl traps	Response >1s, infinite parameter URLs	Server logs, Search Console

Indexability

Item	Pass Criteria	Fail Criteria
Index coverage	>90% of submitted URLs indexed	<70% indexed
Canonical tags	Self-referencing on all pages, consistent	Missing, conflicting, or pointing to wrong URLs
Noindex tags	Only on pages that shouldn't be indexed	On important pages, or missing from thin pages
Duplicate content	<5% of pages flagged as duplicates	>15% duplicate content
Hreflang	Reciprocal, self-referencing, valid codes	Missing return tags, wrong codes, conflicts with canonical

Site Architecture

Item	Pass Criteria	Fail Criteria
Click depth	Important pages within 3 clicks of homepage	Key pages require 5+ clicks
URL structure	Clean, descriptive, consistent hierarchy	Parameters, inconsistent patterns, excessive depth
Navigation	Clear hierarchy, accessible to crawlers	JavaScript-only nav, broken mobile nav
Breadcrumbs	Present with schema markup	Missing or inconsistent
Orphan pages	Zero important orphaned pages	Key pages with no internal links

Page Speed and Core Web Vitals

Metric	Pass	Warning	Fail
LCP (p75 field data)	≤2.5s	2.5-4.0s	>4.0s
CLS (p75 field data)	≤0.1	0.1-0.25	>0.25
INP (p75 field data)	≤200ms	200-500ms	>500ms
TTFB	≤200ms	200-500ms	>500ms
Total page weight	≤500KB	500KB-1MB	>1MB

Use field data from CrUX for scoring, not Lighthouse lab data. Lab scores can be misleading.

Security

Item	Pass	Fail
HTTPS	Sitewide HTTPS with valid certificate	HTTP pages exist, mixed content
HSTS	Strict-Transport-Security header present	Missing
Security headers	X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options	Missing critical headers
Vulnerable dependencies	No known CVEs	Outdated libraries with known vulnerabilities

On-Page Audit Checklist

Title Tags

Item	Pass	Fail
Uniqueness	Every page has a unique title	Duplicate titles across pages
Length	50-60 characters	Truncated (>60) or too short (<30)
Keyword inclusion	Primary keyword in title, front-loaded	Missing target keyword
Branding	Brand name appended consistently	Inconsistent branding

Meta Descriptions

Item	Pass	Fail
Uniqueness	Every page has a unique description	Duplicate or auto-generated
Length	150-160 characters	Truncated or missing
Call to action	Includes CTA or value proposition	Generic "Learn more" or empty
Target keyword	Naturally included	Keyword-stuffed or completely absent

Heading Hierarchy

Item	Pass	Fail
Single H1	One H1 per page matching the primary topic	Multiple H1s or missing H1
Logical hierarchy	H1 → H2 → H3, no skipped levels	H1 → H4, multiple hierarchy breaks
Keyword usage	Primary keyword in H1, related terms in H2s	Keyword-stuffed or irrelevant headings

Content Optimization

Item	Pass	Fail
Content length	Appropriate for topic (1500+ for guides)	Thin content (<500 words for competitive topics)
Entity coverage	Covers all major sub-entities for the topic	Missing key sub-topics competitors cover
Image optimization	Alt text, WebP/AVIF format, responsive	Missing alt text, uncompressed images
Internal links	5+ contextual internal links per article	<3 internal links, generic anchors
Schema markup	Appropriate schema for page type	Missing or invalid schema

Off-Page Audit

Backlink Profile

Item	Pass	Warning	Fail
Referring domains	Growing trend, 100+ for established sites	Flat or slow growth	Declining or <20
Domain authority (DR/DA)	DR 40+ for competitive niches	DR 20-40	DR <20
Link quality	>80% from relevant, authoritative sites	Mixed quality	>30% from toxic/spam sources
Anchor text diversity	Natural distribution (30% branded, 30% topical)	Slightly skewed	>50% exact-match keyword anchors

Brand Signals

Item	Pass	Fail
Branded search volume	Growing trend	Declining or zero
Knowledge Panel	Present in Google	Absent
Brand mentions	Regular mentions on third-party sites	No brand mentions found
Social profiles	Claimed and active	Missing or abandoned

Competitor Gap Analysis

Identify the top 5 competitors for your primary keywords and compare:

Metric	Your Site	Competitor Average	Gap
Referring domains	?	?	?
Content pages on target topic	?	?	?
Average content length	?	?	?
Schema implementation	?	?	?
Topical authority coverage	?	?	?

The gap analysis reveals where you need to invest to compete. A site with 10 referring domains competing against sites with 500+ needs a fundamentally different strategy than a site that's close to parity.

Priority Matrix and Reporting

Impact vs Effort Scoring

Every audit finding gets plotted on a 2x2 matrix:

	Low Effort	High Effort
High Impact	DO FIRST — Quick wins that move rankings	PLAN — Major projects with significant ROI
Low Impact	BATCH — Housekeeping tasks to handle together	SKIP — Not worth the investment

Typical Priority Order

Based on hundreds of audits, this is the most common priority sequence:

1. Fix critical technical issues (broken pages, crawl blocks, indexing problems) — Days 1-7
2. Optimize Core Web Vitals (if failing) — Days 1-14
3. Fix canonical and hreflang issues — Days 7-14
4. Optimize title tags and meta descriptions — Days 14-21
5. Add schema markup — Days 14-21
6. Improve internal linking — Days 21-30
7. Begin content optimization — Days 30-60
8. Start link building campaign — Days 30-90

Reporting to Stakeholders

Executive summary (1 page):

• Overall score as a percentage
• Three most impactful findings
• Estimated traffic opportunity (what you could gain from fixes)
• Investment required (time and cost)

Detailed findings (per pillar):

• Each item with pass/warning/fail status
• Specific examples with URLs
• Remediation instructions
• Expected impact and timeline

Roadmap:

• Priority-ordered task list with effort estimates
• Monthly milestones
• KPIs to track improvement

At Empirium, our audit reports include specific before/after examples and code snippets for technical fixes. A finding that says "fix your canonical tags" isn't actionable. A finding that says "Pages X, Y, and Z have canonical tags pointing to /old-url instead of self-referencing — update the canonical tag in your layout template at line 42" is.

FAQ

How often should I run an SEO audit?

A full comprehensive audit annually. A focused technical audit quarterly. Continuous monitoring (Search Console, Core Web Vitals, crawl errors) should be automated and reviewed weekly. After major site changes (redesign, migration, new content section), run a targeted audit immediately.

Can I do an SEO audit myself or should I hire a professional?

You can run a basic audit yourself with free tools (Search Console, Lighthouse, Screaming Frog free version). However, a professional audit typically catches issues that tools alone miss — content cannibalization patterns, strategic internal linking gaps, and competitive positioning insights require human judgment. The tools find what's broken; a professional identifies what's missing.

What tools do I need for a complete SEO audit?

Essential (free): Google Search Console, Google Analytics, Lighthouse, web-vitals.js Essential (paid): Screaming Frog (£199/year), Ahrefs or SEMrush (from $99/month) Nice to have: Botify (enterprise), ContentKing (real-time monitoring), SpeedCurve (performance)

The combination of Search Console + Screaming Frog + Ahrefs covers 90% of what you need for a thorough audit.

How long does a full SEO audit take?

For a site with 1,000-10,000 pages: 2-3 days for data collection and analysis, 1-2 days for report writing. For sites with 100,000+ pages: 5-10 days. The time investment scales with site complexity, not just page count. A 5,000-page e-commerce site with faceted navigation and international versions takes longer than a 50,000-page content site with a simple structure.

What's the expected ROI from implementing audit recommendations?

Based on our client data: sites that implement the top priority findings from an audit typically see 20-40% organic traffic increase within 6 months. Technical fixes (crawl issues, speed, indexing) produce the fastest results (4-8 weeks). Content and authority improvements take longer (3-6 months) but produce more sustainable growth. The average ROI on a professional SEO audit is 5-10x within the first year.