What should an SEO audit include, and why are most useless?
The problem with the typical audit isn't that it's wrong. It's that everything in it is presented as equally important, which makes it unusable.
Published · Updated
Quick answer
A useful SEO audit should include which of your important pages are indexed and why the others aren't, any pages competing with each other, the searches your buyers use and who ranks for them now, and a short list of fixes in order of what each is worth, with the reasoning attached. Google says an audit should give you realistic estimates of improvement and of the work involved. A hundred pages of tool warnings graded by severity does neither.
Key takeaways
- Google says an audit should give realistic estimates of improvement and of the work involved.
- Severity labels from tools aren't priorities; page value is.
- Search Console shows what Google actually indexed; crawlers only simulate it.
- An audit is worth it only if it changes what gets done first.
A list is not a plan
Run any site through a crawler and you'll get hundreds of findings: short meta descriptions, missing alt text, headings out of order. Most are true, and nearly all are irrelevant to whether the site ranks.
What the report can't tell you is which three of those two hundred items are costing you money. That takes judgement about your market, your competitors and how you make money, and no tool has any of that.
What Google says an audit should give you
Google's guide to hiring an SEO says an SEO audit should be about giving you realistic estimates of improvement, and an estimate of the work involved. It also suggests asking for detailed information about recommendations and the reasoning behind them.
For the audit itself, Google advises granting only read access to Search Console at that stage, not write access.
Tool scores and severity labels aren't priorities
Lighthouse's own documentation says each of its SEO checks is weighted equally in its SEO score (apart from structured data), and that it doesn't evaluate the quality of a meta description, only whether one exists. A score built that way can't tell a cosmetic issue from a costly one.
Google's page experience guidance makes the same point about speed scores: good results in Search Console or third-party tools don't guarantee top rankings, and chasing a perfect score just for SEO may not be the best use of your time.
| Tool finding | Typical label | What actually matters |
|---|---|---|
| Missing meta description on a page with no traffic | Warning | Almost nothing |
| Missing meta description on your top service page | Warning | Worth fixing: it affects how that result looks |
| Pages flagged as duplicate or alternate | Error or warning | Often fine: Google says duplicate or alternate pages are usually working as intended |
| Low site health or Lighthouse SEO score | Critical | Depends entirely on which checks failed, and on which pages |
| Noindex on a page that should rank | Notice | Urgent: the page can't appear in Google at all |
| Two of your pages ranking for the same search | Not reported | Often costly: neither ranks as well as one would |
What an SEO audit should include
- Which important pages are indexed, and the reason each of the others isn't, from Search Console's page indexing report.
- Any of your pages competing with each other for the same search.
- The searches your buyers actually use, and which page should answer each.
- Who ranks for those searches now, and whether those positions are realistically reachable.
- A short, ordered list of fixes, each with its reasoning and an estimate of the work.
Search Console is the source of truth for indexing because it shows what Google actually did. Crawling tools simulate it. Google's page indexing report help also says not to expect every URL to be indexed; the goal is the canonical version of every important page.
Questions to ask before you pay for an audit
- Will it rank fixes by what they're worth to my business, not by tool severity?
- Will it give an estimate of the work involved for each?
- Does it use my Search Console data, or only a crawl?
- Will it say which of my pages compete with each other?
- Will the reasoning be written down, so I can disagree with it?
Is an SEO audit worth it?
Only if it changes what gets done first. An audit that hands over a long list with no order costs you time to read and usually ends up in a drawer. One that says which three things to fix this month, and why, is worth having even if it's short. If you'd like to see how ours is set out, here's how we run an audit.
Common questions
What should an SEO audit include?
Indexing status and the reasons from Search Console, pages competing with each other, the searches your buyers use and who ranks for them, and an ordered list of fixes with reasoning and estimates of work.
Is a site health or Lighthouse SEO score a ranking factor?
Treat it as a checklist, not a ranking measure. Lighthouse weights each of its SEO checks equally and doesn't judge quality, so a score can't tell you what's costing rankings.
Should every page on my site be indexed?
No. Google says not to expect every URL to be indexed; the goal is the canonical version of every important page.
What access does an SEO need for an audit?
Google advises granting only read access to Search Console at the audit stage.
How do I know which audit findings to fix first?
Rank them by what the affected page is worth: problems on pages that earn enquiries or sales come first, whatever the tool's severity label.
Is a free automated SEO audit worth anything?
As a list of things to check, yes. As a plan, no: it can't know which pages make you money or who you're competing with.