How we calculate your scores
Methodology v4.0 · last updated 12 August 2026
Maveriko measures readiness, not outcomes. Every number is built from the checks below — each one emits human-readable evidence and cites the published authority its rule comes from, and this page is generated from the same registry the engine runs, so it can never drift from reality.
Three different questions
Most “AI SEO” tools blur these together. We keep them apart, because they have different answers and different fixes.
SEO Health
Measured here
Can search engines crawl, index and understand this page? Indexability, on-page elements, performance proxies, security and links.
AI Readiness (GEO)
Measured here
Is this page technically and semantically prepared to be retrieved, understood and quoted by an AI engine — and is the brand a resolvable entity at all?
AI Visibility
Not measured
Do AI engines actually mention, recommend or cite this brand right now? That requires querying those engines live and repeatedly.
We do not report an AI Visibility score. A high AI Readiness score means this page is prepared to be cited — it is not evidence that any engine cites you today. Measuring that honestly means running real prompts across engines many times over (answers vary run to run), so we would rather show nothing than synthesize a number. Entity Authority is the closest real proxy we can measure without those APIs, and it is labelled as exactly that.
SEO Health — 100 points
Indexability & Crawlability24 pts
- Page is indexablecritical8
- Valid robots.txt4
- XML sitemap4
- Canonical tag8
On-Page Elements28 pts
- Exactly one H15
- Logical heading hierarchy5
- Title tag length6
- Meta description5
- Image alt text coverage4
- Mobile viewport meta3
Performance22 pts
- HTML document sizeestimated5
per web.dev · LCP
- Text compression4
- Render-blocking resourcesestimated5
- Images have dimensions (CLS)4
per web.dev · CLS
- Server response timedirectional4
per web.dev · TTFB
Security & Trust10 pts
- Served over HTTPScritical5
- HSTS header2
per MDN · HSTS
- No mixed content3
Link Architecture16 pts
- Descriptive anchor text6
- Internal links5
- External links5
AI Readiness, on-page half — 100 points
The headline AI Readiness score blends this on-page half (60%) with off-page Entity Authority (40%) — Wikipedia and Wikidata presence, sameAs linking and self-declared identity. If those lookups fail, the score falls back to the page half alone; a network error is never reported as a low score.
AI Retrievability13 pts
- AI crawler access10
- llms.txtexperimental3
per llms.txt spec
Structured Data34 pts
- Valid JSON-LD10
- Organization / Article / FAQPage schema12
per schema.org · Organization · schema.org · Article · schema.org · FAQPage
- Schema completeness12
Semantic Formatting16 pts
- Bullet listsexperimental6
- Numbered listsexperimental5
- Data tablesexperimental5
E-E-A-T Signals22 pts
- Author byline8
- Publication / update dates7
- Links to authoritative sources7
Direct Answer Readiness15 pts
- Direct answers open each sectiondirectional8
- Clear, confident prosedirectional7
Critical gates
Some failures cap the whole pillar, because no amount of polish elsewhere compensates. Additive scoring alone would rate a noindex page in the 90s and mislead you.
| Condition | Effect |
|---|---|
| This page is set to noindex | SEO score capped at 40 |
| This page is not served over HTTPS | SEO score capped at 60 |
Fairness rules
- Not-applicable ≠ fail. A homepage isn't penalised for lacking an author byline, and a page with no images isn't penalised on alt text — inapplicable checks leave both sides of the calculation and the rest renormalise.
- Language-aware, worldwide. The prose-quality heuristics (readability, passive voice, hedging) are English-specific; on non-English pages they're excluded rather than scored as noise, so a page isn't penalised for the language it publishes in. Every other check — indexability, schema, performance, security, links, AI-crawler access — is region- and language-agnostic, and entity lookups use the brand's own localized Wikipedia. The report shows a “fair scoring” note whenever a non-English page is detected.
- Confidence is labelled. Every finding is tagged: high = measured directly from markup or headers; medium = structural inference; low = heuristic estimate — directional.
- Experimental signals are capped. Some widely-repeated “AI SEO” advice has no published confirmation behind it. Those checks are marked experimental and together carry at most 20 of the 100 AI-Readiness points, so no amount of llms.txt-and-bullet-lists can inflate a score past a page that is genuinely well-structured and trustworthy.
Evidence levels
Two different questions get confused constantly, so we track them separately. Confidence is how sure we are of the measurement. Evidence is how sure the industry is that the thing measured actually matters. A bullet-list count is measured perfectly (high confidence) while the claim that bullet lists win citations is unproven (experimental evidence).
High
Documented by Google, schema.org or an RFC.
44 of 100 AI-Readiness points
Medium
Long-standing, well-supported practice.
37 of 100 AI-Readiness points
Experimental
Plausible convention, no published confirmation.
19 of 100 AI-Readiness points
What we deliberately don't claim
- Rankings. Live rankings depend on backlinks, domain authority, age and competition — off-page factors a single page fetch cannot see. A high SEO score means the controllable part is done.
- Guaranteed AI citations. No one can promise ChatGPT will cite you. Our checks measure the structural properties that improve your chances of being discovered, understood and cited by AI systems.
- Lab Core Web Vitals. Performance checks are structural proxies from one fetch (weight, compression, blocking resources, response time) — not a headless-browser Lighthouse run.
- Actual AI visibility — whether engines name, recommend or cite your brand for a given prompt — requires querying those engines live and repeatedly. We publish no number for it (see Three different questions). Entity Authority measures the groundwork such tracking would build on.
Changelog
The scoring is versioned. When a weight, gate or threshold changes, it's recorded here.
v4.012 Aug 2026
Separated the three questions the product answers: SEO Health, AI Readiness (formerly the GEO score) and actual AI Visibility — which we do not measure and will not synthesize. Added an evidence level to every check (high / medium / experimental) alongside the existing measurement-confidence tag, and rebalanced the AI Readiness page half from 15/30/25/15/15 to 13/34/16/22/15: experimental signals (llms.txt, bullet lists, numbered lists, tables) fell from 30 to 19 of 100 points, with the weight moving to structured data and E-E-A-T. Scores from before this version are not directly comparable.
v3.112 Aug 2026
Every check now cites the authority its rule is based on (Google Search Central, schema.org, web.dev, the published AI-crawler docs). Reports link out to independent verification tools.
v3.011 Aug 2026
Rebalanced SEO to 24/28/22/10/16 across Indexability, On-Page, Performance, Security and Links. Added critical gates (noindex, non-HTTPS), the confidence model, and language-aware scoring so non-English pages aren't penalised on English-only prose checks.
v2.011 Aug 2026
Split the GEO score into Entity Authority (40%, off-page brand presence via Wikipedia/Wikidata) and Page Readiness (60%, on-page). A failed entity lookup returns null, never zero.