Generate professional SEO audit reports your clients will love

How the report generator works

Three steps, and only the middle one takes any thought. The audit and the export are both automatic.

1. 01

   Run an audit

   Enter your client's URL in the audit tool and let CrawlRaven crawl the site.

2. 02

   Customise the report

   Choose your branding, select which sections to include, and add an executive summary.

3. 03

   Download and share

   Download the white-label PDF report or send your client a direct link.

Start with a free audit if you have not run one yet, or look at a sample report to see the output before you commit to anything.

What is in every report

The report compiles the full 200-point audit into a prioritised document a non-specialist can follow. Every one carries an overall health score and a colour-coded issue breakdown, so a client can see the shape of the problem before reading a word of detail.

• Executive summary with SEO health score
• Technical SEO issues (critical, warnings, notices)
• On-page SEO analysis: titles, meta descriptions, headings
• Core Web Vitals and page speed results
• Mobile-friendliness assessment
• Structured data and schema markup review
• Internal linking analysis
• XML sitemap and robots.txt status
• Broken links and redirect chain report
• Image optimisation summary
• Prioritised recommendations with effort/impact ratings
• Competitor comparison benchmarks (optional)

What white-label actually covers

White-labelling a report means the client sees your agency rather than the tool that produced it. Four things carry the branding, and it is worth knowing which.

Writing a report a client will actually read

The generator handles the formatting. What it cannot do is decide what the client should care about, and that judgement is the part they are paying for. Theclient report template is the longer version of this section.

Lead with the three things that matter

A crawl of a mid-sized site produces hundreds of findings. A client can act on three. Use the executive summary to name the three with the largest gap between effort and impact, and let the rest sit in the appendix where it belongs. Which three tend to be worth naming is the subject of the SEO audit report template.

Rank by traffic, not by severity

A critical issue on a page nobody visits costs less than a warning on the page earning half your organic traffic. Severity is a property of the issue; priority is a property of the page it sits on.

The ranking is the deliverable. Anyone can hand over a list of two hundred findings, and a client who receives one has been given the work rather than the answer.

Say what happens if nothing changes

"Missing meta descriptions on 340 pages" is a finding. "Google is writing its own snippet for 340 pages, including the twelve that earn most of your traffic" is a reason to act. The second one is the same fact with the consequence attached.

Keep the technical detail, put it at the back

The developer who has to implement the fixes needs URLs, status codes and exact tags. The person approving the work needs a page and a half. Both readers are in the same document, and the order decides which one gives up.

How often to send one, and what changes each time

The full audit is a one-off document. What a client sees monthly should be a much shorter thing, and the difference between the two is what stops them filing both unread.

Why the quarterly diff is the useful one

A single audit is a snapshot, and a snapshot cannot tell you whether the work is landing. Re-running the same 200 checks a quarter later and comparing the two produces the only report a client actually argues with: this many issues closed, these reopened, these are new since the last release. It also catches the regressions that a release-by-release view misses, because most technical debt reappears through a template rather than through a page.

Frequently asked questions