Rankings do not just come from content. They come from sites that are fast, crawlable, structurally logical, and technically sound. Most sites have invisible problems that cap what their content can achieve — no matter how good the writing is. We find them, fix them, and verify the fix.
A site can look perfectly functional to users while silently failing search engines on multiple fronts. The compounding effect is what makes technical SEO damage so severe — each issue multiplies the others.
The standard technical SEO audit produces a 60-page report that sits in a folder. The developer queue is already full. The issues go unimplemented. Rankings do not change. Six months later, someone orders another audit.
We break the cycle. Issues are prioritised by estimated ranking impact — not by category or severity. Where we have CMS access, we implement fixes directly. Where code changes are required, we write production-ready developer briefs — not vague notes — so that implementation is unambiguous and fast. Every fix is verified with a targeted re-crawl before it is closed.
Structured data tells search engines and AI systems what your content means — not just which words it contains. It is the single highest-leverage technical improvement most sites have not fully implemented, and its importance is growing as AI systems replace traditional search results.
Modern JavaScript frameworks — React, Vue, Angular, Next.js — can create severe SEO problems when implemented without rendering awareness. The site looks perfect in a browser. To Google, significant portions of it may not exist.
Googlebot renders pages in two waves. The first wave — HTML crawl — happens immediately. The second wave — JavaScript rendering — happens in a crawl queue that can lag hours, days, or weeks behind.
For a site where critical content (navigation, internal links, product data, price information, meta tags) is injected by JavaScript after the initial HTML load, that content is invisible to Googlebot during the first wave. If Google doesn't re-render quickly enough, that content may never be indexed.
Common patterns we find: React SPAs where the entire page content is client-rendered (Google sees a blank body), Next.js implementations where SEO-critical pages defaulted to CSR instead of SSR, Vue apps where the router generates internal links that Google never follows, and Angular sites where the meta tags are set by JavaScript after load and therefore ignored.
After 18+ years of technical audits, certain problems appear consistently — regardless of industry, platform, or site size. These are the most common, and the ones that most reliably suppress rankings when left unaddressed.
Done wrong, a migration erases years of accumulated authority in weeks. Done right, it preserves every ranking signal and can actually improve performance. The difference is pre-migration planning — not post-migration recovery.
We work with any CMS — WordPress, Shopify, Webflow, custom-built, and headless architectures. Our audits and recommendations are platform-agnostic. Implementation method varies by platform, and we know the specific technical constraints and optimisation opportunities of each.
We write implementation briefs that are precise enough to be implemented in a single developer session without clarification. For common CMS platforms, we implement fixes directly. For bespoke code changes, our briefs include the exact code required, the file to edit, and the expected outcome — not vague direction.
Both — wherever we have access. The measure of a technical audit is what improves, not what gets listed. We implement directly in the CMS where possible and write production-ready specifications where a developer is needed.
Then we will tell you that. The technical audit is often the first step in a broader engagement. If the foundation is solid, we shift focus to content and authority building. We are not going to invent problems to justify a retainer.
Yes, and the sooner you involve us the better. Pre-migration planning is worth far more than post-migration recovery. See the migration section above for what a properly managed migration looks like.
We run a rendering audit comparing what Googlebot sees against what users see. Where critical content is rendered client-side, we assess whether dynamic rendering, server-side rendering, or pre-rendering is appropriate, and brief the implementation accordingly.
The SEO Clarity report includes a full technical health check and prioritised quick-win list — so you know exactly what is holding you back before committing to a full engagement.