example-clientsite.comAn operating picture of your web presence
A consultancy-grade read on how your site performs, who can use it, and where it wins or loses ground — six lenses, measured where we can and clearly labeled where we estimate.
Prepared by Houtos LabsWe don't guess. We grade.
72C · fair
Overall grade · 0–100
Confidence: Moderate
Report ID
HL-GR-2026-0472
Issued
30 June 2026
Subject
example-clientsite.com
Scope
6 lenses · 26 metrics
Evidence
3 measured · 3 estimated
Method
Peregrine v1
Measured scanned directlyEstimated estimated from public signals — not a verified scan
Every report opens with a snapshot of your homepage, captured at scan time — so the grade is unmistakably about your site. Sample shown here; the live report embeds your actual page.
01
Executive summary
Everything a decision-maker needs in thirty seconds: the one number that matters, the single flag that needs attention, the three things to do first, and the lift they buy.
The 30-second brief
Confidence: Moderate
72 / 100C · fair
A C that is one focused sprint from a B.
The site is fast enough and fundamentally secure, but accessibility is the single urgent flag at 54 — the biggest risk and, conveniently, the cheapest fix. You sit mid-field: ahead of one competitor, one length behind the leader. The four priority fixes below chart a clear path from C to roughly a B in weeks.
Do these three first
1Fix accessibilityImage alt text & form labels — low effort, lowers legal exposure.54 → ~70
2Speed up the first viewCompress hero images, defer non-critical scripts.68 → ~80
After the four "Now" fixes — a projected move from C to B−/B, enough to overtake the field's mid-point. A verified live audit confirms the numbers.
A C that is one step from a B
example-clientsite.com grades 72/100 (C, fair) across six lenses. The site is fast enough and reasonably secure, but accessibility is the single biggest liability at 54 — a measured weakness that is historically associated with ADA complaint exposure and lost customers who simply cannot use the site. The good news: it is also the fastest, highest-return fix on the list. You sit mid-field — ahead of one competitor (70), one length behind the leader (81) — and the four "Now" fixes below chart a clear path from C to roughly a B in a matter of weeks.
Measured 3 lenses scanned directly ·
Estimated 3 lenses estimated from public signals
72C · fair
72 / 100
Overall grade · C, fair
54
Lowest lens · accessibility (urgent)
~80
Projected after the "Now" fixes
The bottom line — three priorities
01Fix accessibility first. At 54 it is both the biggest risk and the cheapest win — image alt text and form labels alone lift it toward 70 and lower legal exposure.
02Speed up the first view. Compressing hero images and deferring non-critical scripts moves performance from 68 toward 80 and keeps visitors from leaving before the page loads.
03Close the competitive gap. You trail the leader by nine points; the accessibility and performance fixes alone would put a B within reach and overtake the field's mid-point.
Status report
State of your web presence Sample
Operational, with one urgent flag. Five of six lenses are green or amber; accessibility is the lone red and the first thing to fix. On current signals the site is fundable for a quick lift to a B.
72 / 100
Overall grade · C, fair
1
Red flag · accessibility (urgent)
4
High-return fixes queued
Speed & Performance Measured68▲ Amber · needs work
Accessibility (ADA / WCAG) Measured54✗ Red · urgent
Security & Privacy Measured76▲ Amber · needs work
Findability (SEO) Estimated81✓ Green · good
Trust & Compliance Estimated63▲ Amber · needs work
Reputation Estimated70▲ Amber · needs work
Search & Growth Growth outlook · outside the sixEstimated66▲ Amber · needs work
Six graded lenses, plus a separate Search & Growth outlook (estimated, shown for context — it is not one of the six). Red / amber / green is shown with a glyph and a word as well as colour. ✓ green = good (80+) · ▲ amber = needs work (60–79) · ✗ red = urgent (under 60). Measured scanned directly · Estimated from public signals.
02
Scorecard at a glance
Six lenses, each scored 0–100. Every score is labeled Measured (scanned directly) or Estimated (estimated from public signals), with what it means for the business.
Axis breakdown · example-clientsite.comHigher is better · 0–100
Performance
68Measured
Accessibility
54Measured
Security
76Measured
SEO & AEO
81Estimated
Trust
63Estimated
Reputation
70Estimated
Speed & Performance Measured
68
Needs work
Business read: the site loads, but slowly enough on phones that some visitors leave before the first view appears — lost traffic you already paid to acquire.
Accessibility (ADA / WCAG) Measured
54
Urgent
Business read: real barriers for screen-reader and keyboard users, and the area most likely to draw an ADA complaint. The biggest single risk on this report.
Security & Privacy Measured
76
Needs work
Business read: encrypted and fundamentally sound. A few missing protective headers leave small gaps — a quick config change closes them.
Findability (SEO) Estimated
81
Good
Business read: public signals suggest search engines find and understand your pages well — your strongest lens. Estimated, not a verified ranking audit.
Trust & Compliance Estimated
63
Needs work
Business read: credibility signals look thin from public pages — a clear privacy policy and consent are hard to confirm. A business-risk view, not legal advice.
Reputation Estimated
70
Needs work
Business read: sentiment reads broadly positive but thin in volume. An estimate from public mentions, not a verified reputation scan.
Six lenses, one view
The whole picture at a glance
Higher is better. Three lenses are scanned directly; three are estimated from public signals.
Performance Measured68
PoorFairGood
Accessibility Measured54
PoorFairGood
Security & Privacy Measured76
PoorFairGood
SEO Estimated81
PoorFairGood
Trust Estimated63
PoorFairGood
Reputation Estimated70
PoorFairGood
Six-axis overview · example-clientsite.com · Measured scanned directly · Estimated estimated from public signals — not a verified scan
03
Grade cards — lens by lens
Every lens gets its own card: what the grade means in plain language, what we actually found, conservative ways to improve — each tagged for effort and impact — and reputable free tools to help you do it yourself. Suggestions are general guidance, not guarantees.
Speed & Performance
MeasuredConfidence: HighNeeds work · projected ~80
D68/ 100
What this means
The site loads, but slowly enough on phones that some visitors leave before the first view appears — traffic you already paid to acquire, gone before the page arrives.
What we found Measured
Largest Contentful Paint is slow on a simulated mobile connection · hero section
Large, uncompressed images are the biggest weight on the page · homepage banner + gallery
Render-blocking scripts load before the page can paint · <head>
How to improve
Consider compressing and resizing the largest images and serving next-gen formats where supported. A common best practice is to keep hero images well under a few hundred KB.
Effort LowImpact High
You may wish to defer non-critical scripts so they load after the first view. Many sites benefit from loading only what the initial screen needs up front.
Effort MediumImpact High
A common best practice is to enable caching and a CDN. Many sites benefit from serving static assets from a fast edge network.
Effort MediumImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Impact varies by site, host, and audience.
Tools to help you
PageSpeed Insights Free
Google's own Core Web Vitals report with specific, prioritized suggestions.
People who use screen readers or keyboards hit real barriers on your site. This is also the lens most often associated with accessibility-related complaints — and, conveniently, the cheapest area to make meaningful progress.
What we found Measured
Images are missing text alternatives · hero + product images
Several text/background pairs fall below the WCAG 2.2 AA contrast ratio · muted captions, footer
Form fields are not programmatically labeled · contact / signup form
Some interactive controls are hard to reach by keyboard alone · menu, carousel
How to improve
Consider adding descriptive alt text to meaningful images and empty alt attributes to decorative ones. A common best practice is to describe the image's purpose, not just its contents.
Effort LowImpact High
You may wish to raise contrast on low-contrast text toward the WCAG 2.2 AA target (4.5:1 for body text). Many sites benefit from darkening muted greys a step.
Effort LowImpact High
A common best practice is to associate a visible label with every form field and to make controls reachable in a logical keyboard order.
Effort MediumImpact High
General guidance — not a guarantee, and not a determination of legal compliance.
Tools to help you
WAVE by WebAIM Free
Visual, in-page checker that flags missing alt text, contrast, and labels.
<!-- Meaningful image: describe its purpose -->
<img src="team.jpg" alt="Our support team on a video call">
<!-- Decorative image: leave alt empty so it is skipped -->
<img src="divider.svg" alt="">
Caveat: This accessibility read is informational, not legal or ADA-compliance advice. For a compliance determination, consult a qualified accessibility professional.
Security & Privacy
MeasuredConfidence: HighNeeds work · projected ~88
C76/ 100
What this means
Your connection is encrypted and the fundamentals are sound. A few protective response headers are missing, which leaves small gaps — a quick configuration change closes most of them.
What we found Measured
HTTPS is active with a valid certificate · whole site
Several recommended security headers are not present · e.g. CSP, HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options
A privacy policy and cookie disclosure are hard to locate from public pages
How to improve
Consider adding the missing security response headers at your host or CDN. A common best practice is to start with a report-only Content-Security-Policy, then tighten it.
Effort LowImpact Medium
You may wish to publish a clear privacy policy and cookie notice that are easy to find. Many sites benefit from linking these in the footer sitewide.
Effort LowImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Test header changes in staging before production.
Tools to help you
securityheaders.com Free
Grades your response headers and shows exactly which are missing.
Caveat: These are surface checks of publicly observable configuration, not a penetration test. For assurance on sensitive systems, engage a qualified security professional.
Findability (SEO & AEO)
EstimatedConfidence: ModerateGood · your strongest lens
B81/ 100
What this means
Public structure and content signals suggest search engines find and understand your pages well — your strongest lens. There is room to be described more accurately by both search and AI answer engines. This is estimated, not a verified ranking audit.
What we found Estimated
Clean, crawlable page structure with a readable URL pattern
Some page titles and meta descriptions are generic or truncated · interior pages
Little structured data (schema.org), which limits AI-answer citability
How to improve
Consider tightening page titles and meta descriptions so each is unique and descriptive. A common best practice is one clear primary topic per page.
Effort LowImpact High
You may wish to add structured data (Organization, Product, FAQ) where it fits. Many sites benefit from schema when it comes to AI-answer citability.
Effort MediumImpact High
A common best practice is to answer real questions directly in clear headings and short paragraphs — the format answer engines tend to quote.
Effort MediumImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee of rankings or citation. Search outcomes vary.
Tools to help you
Google Search Console Free
Your real queries, clicks, and indexing status — straight from Google.
Caveat: This lens is estimated from public signals, and keyword and demand figures are estimates — outcomes vary. A verified audit confirms the specifics.
Trust & Compliance
EstimatedConfidence: ModerateNeeds work · projected ~75
D63/ 100
What this means
From public pages, some credibility signals look thin — a clear privacy policy, visible contact details, and consent are hard to confirm. This is a business-risk view of observed signals, not legal advice.
What we found Estimated
A privacy policy is hard to locate from the public pages we could see
Cookie / consent disclosure is not clearly surfaced
Business identity and contact details are thin on public pages
How to improve
Consider publishing a plain-language privacy policy and linking it in the footer sitewide. Use a template as a starting point — a template, not legal advice.
Effort LowImpact Medium
You may wish to surface a clear consent notice if you set non-essential cookies, and make contact details easy to find. Many sites benefit from a visible "Contact" and physical/business identity.
Effort LowImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Requirements differ by jurisdiction and how you collect data.
Tools to help you
Personalized fix checklist In this report
Your trust items are pre-added to the Empowerment toolkit checklist below.
Caveat: This is not legal advice, and any templates are starting points, not legal documents. Consult qualified counsel for your obligations.
Reputation
EstimatedConfidence: LowNeeds work · build over time
C70/ 100
What this means
From public reviews and mentions, sentiment reads broadly positive but thin in volume — there simply isn't much recent signal to draw on. This is an estimate, not a verified reputation scan.
What we found Estimated
Existing sentiment reads broadly positive across the mentions we could see
Review volume is low, so the signal is thin and easily swayed
Few visible owner responses to public reviews
How to improve
Consider inviting recent, genuine reviews from satisfied customers over time. A common best practice is a simple post-purchase ask — without incentivizing the rating itself.
Effort LowImpact Medium
You may wish to respond to reviews publicly — positive and negative — in a calm, professional voice. Many sites benefit from claiming their business profiles first.
Effort LowImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Follow each platform's review policies.
Tools to help you
Google Business Profile Free
Claim your listing to gather reviews and respond to them publicly.
Caveat: Reputation figures are estimates from public mentions, not a verified scan — outcomes vary and volume can shift the picture quickly.
04
Competitive benchmark
Overall grade, you versus two visible competitors. Competitor scores are estimated from public signals.
Overall grade · field of three
example-clientsite.com You72
competitor-one.com Estimated81
competitor-two.com Estimated70
Where you win: you already outrank competitor-two (70). ·
Where you trail: competitor-one leads at 81 — and accessibility (54) is the single gap standing between you and the top of this field.
Cobalt bar is your site · grey bars are competitors · competitor scores estimated from public signals, not a verified scan
05
Search & demand intelligence
How findable you are, and roughly how much demand that earns you. Two evidence types live here: where you rank is Measured from search results; traffic and demand are Estimated — modeled from public signals, never your private analytics.
5.1Keyword & search-demand grade
What this means: a single keyword score, how your rankings are spread, and the openings worth chasing first. Positions are measured; volume and difficulty are estimated.
66 / 100 — fair keyword footprint. You rank for a healthy spread of terms, but most sit on page two. Three head terms are within striking distance of the top 10 — the fastest route to more measured traffic.
Measured (SERP) ranking positions read from live search results · 142 ranking keywords tracked
Ranking distribution Measured (SERP)
Pos 1–38
Pos 4–1023
Pos 11–2047
Pos 21+64
Most of your keywords (111 of 142) sit on page two or beyond — the lift from page two to page one is where the demand is.
Featured snippet Measured (SERP)2✓ Holding 2 snippets
"People also ask" Measured (SERP)5▲ Present, can grow
AI-answer citability (AEO/GEO) EstimatedLow✗ Rarely cited by AI
Keyword grade rolls up rank, volume and difficulty across 142 tracked terms. Positions are Measured (SERP) from live results; volume, difficulty and AI-citability are Estimated from public signals. Sample data.
How to improve
Consider strengthening the page-two terms already within reach (positions 11–20). A common best practice is to improve the single best-fit page for each, rather than creating new ones.
Effort MediumImpact High
You may wish to answer common questions directly on the page to grow "People also ask" presence and AI-answer citability. Many sites benefit from a concise FAQ.
Effort MediumImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Keyword and demand figures are estimates; outcomes vary.
Tools to help you
Google Search Console Free
Your measured impressions and average position for every query.
Caveat: Volume, difficulty and AI-citability are estimates from public signals — outcomes vary. Ranking positions are measured from live search results.
5.2Visitor & demand estimate
What this means: roughly how much organic demand your findability earns. Every number here is estimated — not your analytics. Read the ranges, not the midpoints.
Estimated · not your analyticsConfidence: Low
Read this first
Every number in this subsection is estimated from public signals — not your analytics. Treat the ranges, not the midpoints, as the answer. A live analytics connection would replace these estimates with measured figures.
Estimated organic demand
Confidence: Low
2.1k – 3.4k
Est. monthly organic visits
Estimated · not your analytics
~$3.2k / mo
Est. value of that traffic
Estimated · not your analytics
~2.7k
Midpoint visits / mo (modeled)
Estimated · not your analytics
Estimated traffic-source mix
Organic search52%
Direct24%
Referral15%
Social9%
Estimated demand — ranges, not exact figures · modeled from public signals, not your analytics
Measure
Low
Midpoint
High
Basis
Monthly organic visits
2,100
2,700
3,400
Estimated
Monthly traffic value (USD)
$2,500
$3,200
$4,100
Estimated
Organic share of visits
46%
52%
58%
Estimated
Estimated from public signals — not your analytics. Ranges reflect modeling uncertainty; the true figure sits somewhere in the band. Confidence is low until a live analytics source is connected. Sample data.
How to improve
Consider connecting a live analytics source so these estimates become measured figures. A common best practice is a free, privacy-respecting analytics tool.
Effort LowImpact High
You may wish to publish depth on the topics you already rank for. Many sites benefit from covering the questions a buyer asks before those a competitor answers.
Effort MediumImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Estimated demand varies with the model and the market.
Tools to help you
Google Analytics Free
Replaces these estimates with your real, measured visitor numbers.
Caveat: Every figure in this card is estimated from public signals — not your analytics. Treat the ranges as the answer; outcomes vary.
5.3Competitive share-of-voice
What this means: you against three named competitors on the metrics that decide who gets found. Grade and keyword counts are measured; traffic and backlinks are estimated.
Higher grade than competitor-two (72 vs 70) on overall quality.
Comparable keyword count to competitor-two with a cleaner technical base.
Two featured snippets already held — a foothold competitor-two lacks.
Where you're behind
competitor-one out-ranks you on 3× the keywords (410 vs 142).
Backlink profile is the thinnest in the field (310 vs up to 1,180).
Estimated traffic trails the leader by roughly 2.4×.
Cobalt bar / highlighted row is your site. Grade and keyword counts are Measured; traffic and backlinks are Estimated from public signals. Sample data.
How to improve
Consider defending the two featured snippets you already hold and shoring up the pages behind them. A common best practice is to keep winning answers fresh and accurate.
Effort LowImpact High
You may wish to earn a few relevant, genuine links over time. Many sites benefit from being genuinely useful to their industry rather than chasing volume.
Effort HighImpact High
General guidance — not a guarantee. Competitive and demand figures are estimates; outcomes vary.
Tools to help you
Google Search Console Free
Shows which sites link to you — the measured basis for your link profile.
Caveat: Traffic and backlink counts are estimated from public signals, not your analytics or an official vendor score — outcomes vary.
5.4Authority & backlinks
What this means: how much trust the wider web lends your domain — and the link gap you would need to close to compete. All figures here are estimated from public link data.
Estimated · public link dataConfidence: Medium
38proxy / 100
Domain authority proxy
Confidence: Medium
128
Referring domains
Estimated · public link data
310
Total backlinks
Estimated · public link data
An authority proxy of 38/100 is workable but light for your field. It is a modeled stand-in for trust, not an official score from any single vendor.
Referring-domain gap vs competitors Estimated
You128
competitor-two96
competitor-three240
competitor-one380
Link gap to close to match the leader: roughly +252 referring domains — a sustained outreach and content effort, not a quick fix.
Authority proxy and link counts are Estimated from public link data — not your analytics, and not an official vendor score. Sample data.
How to improve
Consider creating something genuinely link-worthy — a useful guide, tool, or dataset for your field. A common best practice is to earn links by being cited, not by asking.
Effort HighImpact High
You may wish to reclaim unlinked mentions of your brand. Many sites benefit from a polite note asking that an existing mention be turned into a link.
Effort MediumImpact Medium
General guidance — not a guarantee. Authority is a modeled proxy; closing a link gap takes sustained effort.
Tools to help you
Search Console — Links report Free
Your measured referring domains and top linked pages, straight from Google.
Commission a verified live audit (Lighthouse + axe-core)
Performance budget & monitoring on each release
Quarterly accessibility & compliance review
Sustained reputation & content cadence
Projected trajectory
From C to the A-range, in stages
Today72 · C
After "Now" fixes~80 · B−/B
After "Next" fixes~88 · B+/A−
Projected overall grade at each stage. Projections are estimates based on the deterministic model and are confirmed by a verified live audit.
Empowerment toolkit
Everything you need to act — on your own terms
This report is not just a grade. Here is the personalized checklist, the free tools, the templates, and the built-in consultation — so you can start today, with or without us. All guidance is general and conservative by design.
Your personalized fix checklist
Add alt text & form labels — accessibility, low effort
Raise low-contrast text toward AA — accessibility
Compress hero images, defer scripts — performance
Add security response headers — security
Publish privacy policy & consent — trust
Ordered by return · general guidance, not a guarantee
Free tools, mapped to your gaps
PageSpeed Insights · speed
WAVE + Contrast Checker · accessibility
securityheaders.com + SSL Labs · security
Google Search Console · findability & links
Each tool is free · opens in a new tab
Starter templates
Privacy policy outline — a template, not legal advice
Cookie / consent notice — a template, not legal advice
Security-headers snippet — test in staging first
Review-request message — follow platform rules
Templates are starting points · consult counsel for legal documents
Ask this report & re-grade
Put a plain-language question to your findings in the Ask this report consultation — standard questions are free. When you have made changes, run a free re-grade to see your new score. No charge to check your progress.
Standard questions free · re-grade free
08
Methodology & confidence
The grade spans 5 axes and 26 metrics, each scored 0–100 and rolled up into the overall. Two kinds of evidence sit behind it — and we always tell you which is which.
Measured
Scanned directly
Performance, Accessibility, and Security & Privacy are read from the live page. These carry the highest confidence and are the basis for any risk language in this report.
Estimated
Estimated from public signals
Findability, Trust & Compliance, Reputation, and all traffic, demand and authority figures are estimated from publicly visible signals. They are directional indicators — never presented as a verified scan, and worth confirming with a full live audit. Keyword positions are the exception: those are measured directly from live search results.
On the demand numbers: traffic, visitor and authority estimates in this report are modeled from public signals, not your private analytics — treat them as ranges, and connect a live analytics source to replace them with measured figures.
Compliance note
Trust, compliance and accessibility findings describe business risk and observed signals that may be historically associated with regulatory exposure — not a legal determination. This assessment does not constitute legal advice.
How we measure vs estimate
Measured lenses (Performance, Accessibility, Security) are read from the live page and carry the highest confidence — they are the basis for any risk language here.
Estimated lenses and all traffic, demand and authority figures are modeled from publicly visible signals: directional, never a verified scan. Keyword positions are the exception — measured from live results.
Data provenance
Sourced from the live page and public web signals only. This is not your private analytics — no Google Analytics, no server logs, no account data. Connect a live analytics source to replace estimates with measured figures.
Live pageSERP Public signals
Not legal advice
Trust, compliance and accessibility findings describe business risk and observed signals that may be historically associated with regulatory exposure — not a legal determination, and not legal advice. A verified live audit (Lighthouse + axe-core) confirms the specifics.
Report HL-GR-2026-0472 · Method Peregrine Precision Evaluator v1 · Issued 30 Jun 2026Houtos Labs · We don't guess. We grade. · Sample
09
Ask this report
Your report comes with a built-in consultation. Ask it anything about your findings — in plain language, grounded only in this report.
Ask this report Sample
100%
Consultation remaining100%
Standard questions are free and never use up your consultation. Deeper, custom questions — the kind that need fresh analysis of your site — draw it down a little each time.
Sample only — the live report answers in real time, powered by your findings.
Free to ask
Free Which fix gives the biggest lift?Free What do I do first?Free Explain this issue to my developerFree Is this a legal risk?
Sample
Ask this reportConsultation · 100%
You
You askedWhat should I fix first?
Standard question · free · meter unchanged
Ask this report
Start with accessibility — it's your lowest lens at 54 and the cheapest to move. Adding image alt text and form labels alone is projected to lift it toward 70, and it lowers the risk area most often tied to ADA complaints.
From your scan · Accessibility 54, measured
You
You askedDraft a 6-week plan my two developers could actually follow, with the fixes in order.
Custom analysis · draws the meter down a little
Ask this report
Here's a staged plan grounded in your findings — Weeks 1–2: alt text, form labels and contrast (accessibility 54 → ~70). Weeks 3–4: compress hero images, defer non-critical scripts (performance 68 → ~80). Weeks 5–6: add security headers and publish a privacy policy (security & trust). A verified live audit confirms the numbers.
From your scan · 3 measured lenses + roadmap
Ask about your report…
Free Standard questions never use up your consultation.Run it low? Refill to 100% ($50, adds $50 credit), book a scope call ($295), or subscribe for ongoing reports.
Sample exchange · the live consultation answers in real time, grounded only in your findings. Standard questions are free; deeper custom analysis draws the meter down.
When your consultation is used up
Example state
Consultation remaining0%
In the live report you will be able to keep going one of two ways:
Refill $50
Top your consultation back to 100% and keep asking this report your questions. Each $50 also adds $50 of development credit (90-day window).
Book a development scope call $295
Bring in our developers. We turn this report into a scoped plan to actually fix and ship it.
This is a sample built from public-signal modeling. The four "Now" fixes are clear, low-cost, and well within reach — and a verified live audit turns these projections into a measured plan. Run a free grade now, or email us to book a scope call and we bring in our developers.
Sample · all sales final; your $50 converts to a $50 development credit, valid 90 days (Credits policy — all sales final) · see how we grade in our methodology.