isp.tools 55 D
🛡️ SEO 13 🤖 GEO 75 ⚡ Perf 52 🏗️ Arch 78

isp.tools — Global SEODiff Score 55/100

isp.tools
📊

The AI-Readiness profile for isp.tools is strong: an ACRI of 70/100 places it ahead of 67% of domains in the index. Compared to other developer sites (avg score: 57), isp.tools performs above the benchmark, suggesting strong competitive positioning in AI search. Content is delivered server-side, meaning bots and AI agents can parse the full page without executing JavaScript. Token bloat registers at 9.7× — acceptable, but reducing inline scripts and redundant markup could yield measurable gains. Zero schema blocks puts this site at a disadvantage in knowledge graph and AI-answer pipelines that rely on explicit structured data. All major AI bot user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, CCBot, Google-Extended) are permitted by robots.txt, ensuring broad AI crawler access.

55
D — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Below average — Traditional SEO (13) has the most room for improvement.
🎯 Top Fix: Add Organization + WebSite JSON-LD → +5–8 pts
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Mar 19, 2026 · 📋 API
📈 ACRI Trend 5 snapshots
Mar 1 Mar 19
🔔 Recent AI Indexing Activity
🔄 Mar 19 Content change detected
🔄 Mar 13 Content change detected
Does your site score higher than isp.tools?
Run the same 40-signal audit on your own domain — free, instant results.
Scan Your Site Free →
🧮 Score Transparency — How is this calculated?
🛡️ Traditional SEO (25% weight)13 × 0.25 = 3.2
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)75 × 0.40 = 30.0
⚡ Performance (20% weight)52 × 0.20 = 10.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)78 × 0.15 = 11.7
Weighted sum = 3.2 + 30.0 + 10.4 + 11.7
Global SEODiff Score = 55 (D)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
34
Structure
avg 35
0
Schema
avg 9
85
Tech Stack
avg 63
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 50%+
Rank #534027
-20 pts
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 33%
Score 70/100

isp.tools ranks much higher on Google (Tranco Top 50%+) than in AI search (Top 33%). This is the 'Visibility Gap' pattern — implementing the recommendations above can help close the AI gap. ACRI measures technical crawler readiness. Read the methodology →

Why isp.tools ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industrydeveloper
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage0 blocks
Token bloat9.7×

Fastest improvements

  • Add basic Organization and WebSite JSON-LD to fix “0 schema blocks” (see Schema Coverage).
  • Reduce token bloat (navigation/footer/code) so agents reach your main content faster (see Token Bloat).
  • Create an llms.txt file so AI crawlers can discover your content structure without heavy crawling. Generate llms.txt →
  • Run a full entropy audit to find which DOM regions waste the most tokens. Run Entropy Audit →
🧪

JavaScript Rendering Check

We check what AI crawlers miss when they skip JavaScript execution.

Running headless browser to simulate AI extraction…
🛡️

Traditional SEO

13/100 25 % of Global Score 🟡 Medium Confidence

📝 Title Tag

70 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

0 chars
Missing

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✗ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 0
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 15
  • ✗ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

  • ✓ Canonical tag present → https://www.isp.tools/
  • ✓ No noindex directive
  • ✓ Meta viewport set
  • ✓ HTML lang attribute → en-US
  • ✅ Hreflang tags
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed by robots.txt

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✗ og:title
  • ✗ og:description
  • ✗ og:image
  • ✗ twitter:card
📐 How the SEO Pillar score is calculated

SEO Pillar = Title (20 pts) + Meta Desc (20 pts) + Heading Hierarchy (20 pts) + Indexability (20 pts) + Social/OG (20 pts)

Each sub-score is derived from the checks above. Canonical tag, lang attribute, og:image, and a single H1 are the highest-impact items.

🤖

AI Readiness / GEO

75/100 40 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

This pillar aggregates citation share, hallucination risk, bot access, schema health, and content extractability. The individual diagnostic sections below contribute to this score.

🔗

Citation Alternatives

Research
💡
Insight: In the developer sector, hikkoshizamurai.jp (ACRI: 88) currently has stronger AI extractability. AI models tend to prefer sources with higher semantic structure and schema coverage. Domains with ACRI < 40 see 3.5× more hallucinations. Read the research →
isp.tools
46
Your ACRI Score
88
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. hikkoshizamurai.jp has schema coverage of 5 blocks and uses Custom / Proprietary. Improve your score by implementing the remediation patches below.
📊 Side-by-Side Comparison →
🚨

Hallucination Risk

Research

Is AI lying about your brand? This panel measures how likely LLMs are to hallucinate facts when extracting information from your page.

Analyzing hallucination risk…

🤖 Bot Access Matrix

GPTBot (OpenAI)
Allowed
ClaudeBot (Anthropic)
Allowed
CCBot (Common Crawl)
Allowed
Google-Extended
Allowed
Googlebot
Allowed

👻 Rendering (Ghost Ratio) Docs

Ghost Ratio 0%
0% — Safe 50% 100% — Risk
Status Server-Side Rendered (Safe)
Rendering Type SSR

📊 Structure & Information Density Docs

Structure Grade 34/100 — Low
Structured Elements 30 elements (30 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words845
Raw Density3.5%
💡Low structure score (34/100). Your content appears as a wall of text with few structured HTML elements. You have 30 list items, 0 table rows, 0 table headers. Convert features into <ul> lists and data into <table> elements to help AI models extract structured information.

🏷️ Schema Health Docs

Organization Schema ❌ Missing
Product / Service Schema ⚠️ Not Found
Total Schema Blocks0 — No JSON-LD detected

Schema Coverage Map

0/7 schema types detected
❌ Organization
❌ Product/Service
❌ Breadcrumb
❌ FAQ
❌ Article
❌ WebSite
💡Organization schema missing. AI models cannot identify your brand entity. Without it, your brand won't appear in Knowledge Panels or be associated with your content.
💡Product / Service schema missing. AI models don't know this is a SaaS product. Add Product or SoftwareApplication schema so AI understands what you offer and can surface pricing/features.
💡BreadcrumbList schema missing. AI cannot understand your site hierarchy or how pages relate to each other.
💡FAQ schema missing. Adding FAQPage schema lets AI models directly extract Q&A pairs for Featured Snippets and chatbot answers.
💡WebSite schema missing. Add WebSite + SearchAction so Google can generate a Sitelinks Search Box for your brand in AI results.

📐 AI Efficiency Metrics Docs

46
AI Extractability
Medium
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability46/100 — AI models can partially extract answers from this page
Crawl CostMedium (65/100) — moderate for AI crawlers to process
Blocklist RiskNone — 0 of 5 AI crawlers blocked

Token Bloat Research

10%
🗑️ 90%
Useful Content (46.3 KB)Bloat (401.7 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio9.7× — Normal

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context69% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage143 / 208 images have alt text

TDM Rights

TDM-Reservation HeaderNot set
X-Robots-Tag: noaiNot set

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

0 Entropy
Poor Token Bloat: High
Noise Ratio: 89.7% · SNR: 0.12 · Signal: 11843 / Noise: 102835 tokens

🔬 AI-Crawler Simulation

See your website the way AI crawlers do. CSS stripped, structure labeled, content chunked.

🌐
This is what humans see — styled, branded, visual.
Toggle to "AI Agent View" to see what GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and other AI crawlers actually extract from this page.
🤖

AI Answer Preview

NEW

See how AI models summarize your site. Left: your actual content. Right: what the LLM extracts and says about you.

Simulating AI extraction…
🧠

The LLM Interpretation

AI-VERIFIED

SEODiff AI analyzed the extracted content of isp.tools and produced this structured business intelligence. Fields marked SEMANTIC VOID indicate information the AI could not find — a critical gap in your site’s machine-readability.

Core Offering
ISP.Tools is a free online tool for Brazilian network administrators to independently diagnose and resolve connectivity issues by testing external network paths.
Target Audience
Network administrators, system administrators, IT professionals, ISPs
Pricing Model
Free tool with optional financial support and test point participation.
🏆 Competitive Moat
Global pioneer in independent external IP network testing through collaboration with worldwide service providers.
📊 Content Depth
6/10
⚡ Key Pain Points
• Reliance on competing providers for assistance
• Need for independent diagnostics
Analyzed by SEODiff AI · 2026-03-25

🔧 Tech Stack

FrameworkWordPress
AI-Readiness Score85/100
ServerLiteSpeed
CDN
HTTP Status200
Load Time672 ms
Raw HTML Size448.0 KB
Visible Text Size46.3 KB

Performance & Speed

52/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

672 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

Google considers <200 ms "good". AI crawlers may have even shorter timeouts.

📦 Page Weight

2162
DOM nodes
448 KB
HTML payload
Heavy page — consider reducing DOM complexity

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✓ Cache-Control header → no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate
  • ✗ CDN cache status
  • ✗ CDN detected

🔬 Tracker Tax

1
tracker scripts
1
third-party domains
0.0%
token overhead
Minimal tracker load — clean signal for bots
googletagmanager.com
📐 How the Performance Pillar score is calculated

Perf Pillar = TTFB (35 pts) + Page Weight (25 pts) + Cache/CDN (20 pts) + Tracker Tax (20 pts)

TTFB <200 ms = full marks. DOM >3000 or payload >300 KB incurs heavy penalties. Tracker scripts beyond 5 reduce score.

🏗️

Architecture & Trust

78/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

  • ✓ Sitemap declared in robots.txt → https://www.isp.tools/sitemap.xml
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed
  • ✓ GPTBot allowed
  • ✓ ClaudeBot allowed

🔗 Linking

291
internal links
7
external links
Good internal linking — helps crawlers discover content

🔒 Security & Trust

  • ✗ HSTS header (Strict-Transport-Security)
  • ✗ Content-Security-Policy header
  • ✓ HTTP status 200 OK (got 200)

♿ Accessibility Signals

  • ✓ HTML lang attribute → en-US
  • ✓ Meta viewport for mobile
  • ✗ Single H1 for screen readers
📐 How the Architecture Pillar score is calculated

Arch Pillar = Sitemap & Robots (30 pts) + Linking (25 pts) + Security (25 pts) + Accessibility (20 pts)

Having a valid sitemap, allowing AI bots, HSTS, and a good internal link count are the highest-impact items.

🏅 AI-Verified Trust Badge

Your site scores 46/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for isp.tools
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/isp.tools" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=isp.tools" alt="AI-Verified by SEODiff" width="280" height="52"></a>

💡 Paste in your site footer, GitHub README, or email signature. Badge updates automatically as your score changes.

� Deep Crawl Analysis 9 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
46
Single-page score
+9
Consistent readability
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
56
Avg across 9 pages · Range 46–64
Topical Cohesion
5%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
5596
Avg Bloat
142.3×
RAG Fractures [?]
9
⚠️
9 RAG-Chunking Fractures Detected

Poorly formatted tables or pricing grids on 9 pages will be split incorrectly during RAG chunking, causing AI models to hallucinate prices and features.

Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://isp.tools/faq
ISP.Tools | FAQ
pricing 64 63.7× 1087 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/pricing
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/about
ISP.Tools | About
pricing 56 92.5× 626 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/products
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/features
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/blog
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/case-studies
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/integrations
ISP.Tools | Instant global network diagnostics for ISPs and engineers.
pricing 56 153.7× 597 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://isp.tools/docs
ISP.Tools | DOCSIS 4.0 Milestone Reached in Moline
pricing 46 202.4× 301 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
📂
Health by Sub-Directory
Average ACRI and top issues aggregated by URL path prefix
Path Pages Avg ACRI Ghost % Bloat Top Issue
/faq/ 1 64 0% 63.7× High JS Bloat
/case-studies/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
/features/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
/blog/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
/docs/ 1 46 0% 202.4× High JS Bloat
/integrations/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
/about/ 1 56 0% 92.5× High JS Bloat
/pricing/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
/products/ 1 56 0% 153.7× High JS Bloat
🔗
Outbound External Citations
0 unique external domains cited across 9 pages
feedback.isp.tools ×9
api.isp.tools ×9
uptime.isp.tools ×9
fb.com ×9
instagram.com ×9
x.com ×9
producthunt.com ×6
evento.abramulti.com.br ×6
🔄 Re-Crawl & Update 📡 Track this Domain

Scores update automatically each month. Create a free account for on-demand re-crawls (3/month free).

🔌 API Access

Pull this data programmatically. All sub-page metrics are available via our public API.

curl https://seodiff.io/api/v1/deep10/domain/isp.tools

Get your free API key — 100 requests/month included.

🔗 Similar developer Sites

Domains with a similar tech stack, industry, and AI readiness profile to isp.tools. Compare side-by-side.

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
isp.tools (this site) 46 70 WordPress 9.7× 0
powrotroberta.pl 71 88 WordPress 11.4× 1 Compare →
ogopendata.com 71 85 WordPress 11.4× 1 Compare →
consejogeneralenfermeria.org 71 83 WordPress 5.6× 0 Compare →
one2team.com 71 79 WordPress 7.2× 1 Compare →
go.tackle.io 71 90 WordPress 11.2× 2 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →

📊 Semantic Share of Voice

How often would an AI cite isp.tools when users ask about topics in this domain's niche? We run entity queries through our 188k-page search index and measure citation probability.

Analyzing citation landscape…

🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

Auto-generated code fixes tailored to isp.tools. Copy and paste these into your codebase to improve AI visibility. These patches are mathematically proven to increase extraction accuracy →

Add Organization JSON-LD
High Impact ⏱ 5 min
AI models cannot identify your brand entity without Organization schema. This is the #1 fix for AI visibility.
html
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Organization",
  "name": "Tools",
  "url": "https://isp.tools",
  "logo": "https://www.isp.tools/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/cropped-icon-32x32.png",
  "sameAs": []
}
</script>
Add WebSite + SearchAction JSON-LD
High Impact ⏱ 5 min
Enables the Sitelinks Search Box in Google and allows AI to understand your site structure.
html
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "WebSite",
  "name": "Tools",
  "url": "https://isp.tools",
  "potentialAction": {
    "@type": "SearchAction",
    "target": "https://isp.tools/search?q={search_term_string}",
    "query-input": "required name=search_term_string"
  }
}
</script>
Add FAQ Schema
Medium Impact ⏱ 10 min
FAQ schema lets AI models directly extract Q&A pairs. This is the easiest way to get featured in AI responses.
html
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "FAQPage",
  "mainEntity": [
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "What is Tools?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Add your answer here — describe what Tools does in 1-2 sentences."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "How does Tools work?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Explain the key features and how users interact with Tools."
      }
    }
  ]
}
</script>
📈

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

If you apply the patches above, here's the estimated improvement for isp.tools:

Current Score
70
Projected Score
86
Improvement
+16 pts
Add Organization schema +6 pts
Add WebSite schema +4 pts
Reduce token bloat +3 pts
Add FAQ schema +3 pts

*Estimates based on SEODiff's scoring model. Actual results depend on implementation quality.

📋 Data Export

Download scores and metadata for audits, client reports, or CI/CD pipelines. Exports contain computed metrics only (no copyrighted content).

All data is generated automatically and updated with each crawl. JSON exports contain scores and metadata only (no copyrighted content).

Is this your company?

Monitor your AI visibility score weekly and get alerted when changes happen.

Start Free →

🧭 Self-Diffing (Private Layer)

For owned domains, combine this world snapshot with private drift + regression history.
Template Drift
Track in My Site
Drift → Traffic Impact
In development coming soon
Regression Incidents
Track in My Site
Internal Linking
Deep Audit graph
Semantic Structure
GEO view in Deep Audit
Content Quality
Thin/duplicate tracking

🕒 History

Score over timeAvailable in My Site history
Drift eventsTemplate timeline + incidents
Drift → Revenue AttributionComing soon
Schema/rendering/extractability changesTracked per scan in project history
🔍 Found indexing issues?
Run a free deep audit to diagnose crawled-not-indexed, soft 404s, redirect errors, and more.
Free Deep Audit → GSC Error Guide →