On-Page SEO Checker
Audit any page against 14 on-page factors and get a graded report explaining what each one means.
Free and instant — results appear in seconds. No sign-up, no limits, and nothing you type is stored.
Paste a URL and this reads the page the way a crawler does — the actual HTML your server returns, not a rendered screenshot. It grades fourteen on-page factors and tells you what each result means in practice.
It checks one page at a time, deliberately. On-page factors are per page: your homepage passing says nothing about the article that is actually trying to rank.
A worked example
Running the checker against a typical WordPress article returns something like this:
Title tag — warning
How to Migrate a WordPress Site Without Losing Rankings or Breaking Permalinks in 2026 at 84 characters. It reads well but Google truncates around 55–60, so everything past Rankings is invisible in results. Cutting it to Migrate WordPress Without Losing Rankings keeps the meaning and fits.
H1 heading — warning
Three H1 tags found. The theme wraps the site logo in one, the post title in another, and a sidebar widget heading in a third. Only the post title should be H1.
Image alt text — warning
11 of 14 images have no alt text. These were bulk-uploaded from a screenshot folder, so the filenames carried across and the alt attributes were never filled.
Indexability — pass
index, follow. Worth confirming every time — a staging noindex surviving a launch is the single most expensive on-page mistake there is.
Overall: 74% — grade B
The structural bones are fine. Fixing the title length and the H1 duplication takes about ten minutes and addresses most of the gap.
What it checks
Title tag — presence, length in characters, and whether it will survive truncation. Meta description — presence and length. H1 — whether one exists and whether there are several. Heading structure — whether levels run in order or skip from H2 to H4.
Content length — total word count with the caveat that depth is not a ranking factor by itself. Image alt text — how many images ship without it. Canonical tag — present, and whether it points at this page or declares it a duplicate. Indexability — whether a robots meta tag is quietly telling search engines to stay away.
Mobile viewport, language declaration, internal and external link counts, Open Graph tags, JSON-LD structured data including whether it parses, and response time and HTML weight.
What it deliberately does not check
It does not report keyword difficulty, search volume, or a domain authority score. Those numbers come from licensed third-party databases, and a tool that invents them is worse than no tool at all — it gives you confident-looking figures with nothing behind them.
It also does not execute JavaScript. If your content is client-rendered, this sees what the crawler sees on first pass, which is frequently the more useful answer.
Reading the grade
The score is weighted, not a simple count. A missing title costs far more than a missing lang attribute, because it matters far more. A page that scores 70% with a strong title and clean headings is in better shape than one scoring 85% by passing a dozen trivial checks while the H1 is missing.
Treat the grade as a triage tool. The failures at the top of the list are where the time goes.
The mistakes this catches most often
A staging noindex that survived the launch. A canonical tag left pointing at the development domain. Titles written for a 512-pixel limit that has not applied for years. Images bulk-uploaded with filenames as alt text. Three H1s because the theme wraps the logo, the page title and the sidebar heading all in the same tag.
None of these are exotic. All of them are quiet, and all of them cost traffic.
Frequently asked questions
Does this run JavaScript?
No. It reads the HTML your server returns on the first request, which is what a crawler sees before any rendering pass. If your content only appears after JavaScript runs, this will show you the gap — and that gap is usually worth knowing about.
Why does it check one page instead of the whole site?
Because on-page factors are per page. Your homepage can be immaculate while the article you actually want ranking has no meta description and three H1s. Site-wide crawling is a different tool with different costs, and it tends to produce a list too long to act on.
Why is there no keyword difficulty or search volume?
Those figures come from licensed databases — Google Ads data, clickstream panels, or a crawler operating at a scale that costs real money. Any free tool showing you a difficulty score is either reselling paid data or making it up. This tool only reports what it can actually observe on your page.
My score is 70%. Is that bad?
Not necessarily. The score is weighted, so a page can lose points on things that barely matter. Read the failures rather than the number: a missing title on a 90% page is a bigger problem than five warnings on a 65% page.
Can I check a page behind a login?
No. The checker makes an anonymous request, so anything requiring authentication will return the login page instead. Test on a public URL, or a staging site with HTTP auth disabled.
Does a higher score mean better rankings?
No, and be sceptical of any tool implying otherwise. On-page hygiene removes obstacles — it does not create demand for your page. A technically perfect page about a topic nobody searches for will not rank. What this catches is the opposite case: a genuinely useful page held back by something fixable.
Why does it flag my canonical when the page is fine?
It flags a canonical pointing somewhere other than the URL you tested. That is often deliberate on paginated or filtered pages. It is a warning rather than an error precisely because only you know the intent.
Reviews
No reviews yet. If this tool solved something for you, yours would be the first — and it helps other people decide whether it is worth their time.