Technical SEO Agency

Technical SEO decides whether anything else you do can work. If a search engine cannot crawl a page, render it, or tell it apart from four near-identical versions of itself, then the content on it and the links pointing at it are wasted. We fix access first, performance second, and hand the work to your developers as tickets they can ship.

The 20% of technical SEO that moves revenue

Most technical audits list hundreds of issues and change nothing. In practice, revenue moves on a short list: pages that should be indexed and are not, templates that generate duplicates at scale, a slow or unstable Largest Contentful Paint on commercial pages, JavaScript that hides the main content from crawlers, and internal linking that strands the pages you most want to rank. We fix those first and leave the cosmetic warnings alone.

What we examine

Crawl and index. We reconcile what your site publishes against what Google has actually indexed, using Search Console alongside a full crawl and, where server logs are available, what Googlebot really requested. That surfaces the issues that matter: pages blocked in robots.txt, noindex left on after a launch, orphaned pages with no internal links, soft 404s, and crawl budget being spent on parameter URLs and filtered views instead of your money pages.

Information architecture and internal linking. Click depth from the homepage, the shape of the category tree, breadcrumb consistency, and which pages receive internal links and which receive none. On large sites this is usually the single highest-return fix, because the authority is already on the domain and simply is not reaching the right templates.

Core Web Vitals. We work from field data in the Chrome UX Report rather than lab scores alone, because the lab number tells you what a test machine did and the field number tells you what your customers experienced. Largest Contentful Paint, Interaction to Next Paint and Cumulative Layout Shift, diagnosed by template rather than by page, so one fix repairs thousands of URLs.

JavaScript rendering. We compare the raw HTML with the rendered DOM to find content, links and metadata that exist only after client-side execution. Assistant crawlers are far less patient here than Googlebot, so anything commercially important belongs in the server-rendered HTML.

Structured data. Which schema types are present, whether they validate, whether required properties are missing, and whether the entity relationships between your organisation, products and locations are coherent. Valid markup will not rescue a weak page, but broken markup quietly removes eligibility for rich results.

Canonicalisation, duplication and hreflang. Conflicting canonical signals, trailing-slash and protocol variants, faceted navigation multiplying URLs, and, on international sites, hreflang clusters that fail to return the favour and so get ignored altogether.

Our audit process

Days 1 to 3: discovery. Full crawl, Search Console and analytics access, log samples if you can supply them, and a short call with whoever owns the codebase so we know what is possible before we recommend it.

Days 4 to 8: analysis. Crawl data, index data, field performance data and rendering tests reconciled against each other. Findings are grouped by template and by root cause, not by URL, because a list of 40,000 affected URLs is not a finding.

Days 9 to 12: prioritisation. Every issue scored on likely commercial impact against implementation effort, with the traffic and revenue attached to the affected pages so the ordering is arguable rather than asserted.

Days 13 to 15: handover. A working session with your developers to walk through the tickets, agree the sequence, and settle what goes into the next sprint.

What you’ll receive

A prioritised fix list, ordered by revenue impact, with the reasoning shown. Dev-ready tickets written for the people who will implement them, including the affected templates, the acceptance criteria and how to verify the fix. A competitor technical comparison for the sites currently ranking above you. And a before-and-after tracking sheet with the baseline measurements captured on day one, so three months later there is a factual answer to whether the work paid for itself.

Proof

Theatre Tokens is the clearest example of the pattern: site speed and Core Web Vitals were holding back both users and rankings, and improving loading speed, responsiveness and interactivity alongside a new content capability produced a 64% increase in revenue and 15 to 25% year-on-year organic growth per month.

Amulet started from no measurable presence in organic search at all. Building the foundations from zero delivered a 123%+ year-on-year increase in organic traffic and a 437% increase in search visibility.

The tools we run

Two of the checks we run in the first days of an audit are available to you free, with no sign-up. Our website SEO audit analyses Core Web Vitals, page speed, on-page elements and technical health, and returns a prioritised list of issues with severity levels. Our schema markup report parses a page’s JSON-LD and Microdata, validates it against Schema.org, and tells you which rich results the page qualifies for and which required properties are missing.

Both are genuinely useful and both have a ceiling. They test pages, not templates; they cannot read your server logs, compare rendered against raw HTML at scale, or weigh a finding against the revenue behind the page. Run them first, and if the output raises more questions than it answers, that is the point at which a manual audit earns its fee.

What technical SEO costs

A one-off technical audit is scoped to the brief, because the work on a 300-page brochure site and a 300,000-URL catalogue are not the same job. The variables are site size, platform, whether server logs are available, and how many international or subdomain properties are in scope. You get a fixed price before we start.

Ongoing technical SEO inside a retainer starts from £1,100 a month ex VAT, and on most sites that is better value than a standalone audit: the fixes get implemented, verified and re-measured rather than filed. If you already have a strong in-house development team and only need the diagnosis, the one-off audit is the right purchase. Tell us which you need and we will scope it honestly.

Frequently asked questions

How long does a technical SEO audit take?

Roughly three weeks from access to handover for a typical site: three days of discovery, five days of analysis, four days of prioritisation, then a working session with your developers. Very large catalogues or multi-market sites take longer, and we tell you that when we scope rather than after we start.

Will I need my developers, or do you implement the fixes?

Both models work. We can hand your team dev-ready tickets and review the implementation, or we can implement directly where we have access and your platform allows it. Most clients start with the first and move to the second for the fixes their own roadmap keeps deprioritising.

How long before technical fixes show in rankings?

Indexing and crawl fixes can show within days once the affected pages are recrawled. Core Web Vitals improvements need enough field data to move the 28-day rolling average, so expect a month before the reported numbers change. Architecture and internal linking changes typically take two to three months to settle.

Do Core Web Vitals actually affect rankings?

They are a real but modest ranking signal, and they are a large conversion signal. The honest position is that fixing a slow, unstable page rarely lifts you past a much stronger competitor on its own, but it removes a handicap and usually pays for itself in conversion rate before it pays for itself in rankings.

Is schema markup worth implementing?

For rich results, yes, where your content genuinely qualifies. It does not make a page rank higher by itself, and no amount of markup compensates for a page that does not deserve the position. Treat it as eligibility for a better-looking result, not as a ranking tactic. You can check what your pages currently have with our schema report.

My site is built in React. Is that a problem?

Not inherently, but it needs care. Google can render JavaScript, though rendering is queued and can lag crawling; the assistant crawlers behind AI answers are considerably less capable. Anything commercially important should be present in the server-rendered HTML rather than injected client-side, which usually means server-side rendering or static generation for your key templates.

What is the difference between a technical audit and an SEO audit?

A technical audit answers whether search engines can crawl, render, understand and trust your site. A broader SEO audit adds keyword targeting, content quality and off-site authority. Technical work is the prerequisite: if crawling and rendering are broken, improving content and earning links makes very little difference.

Do you work with sites outside the UK?

Yes. We run campaigns for UK, Irish and Australian markets, and international technical work — hreflang clusters, market-level indexing and duplicate-content control across territories — is a regular part of the job rather than an exception.