clarivate.xyz 68 C
🛡️ SEO 75 🤖 GEO 81 ⚡ Perf 22 🏗️ Arch 83

clarivate.xyz — Global SEODiff Score 68/100

clarivate.xyz
📊

The AI-Readiness profile for clarivate.xyz is strong: an ACRI of 80/100 places it ahead of 94% of domains in the index. Within the education vertical, this places clarivate.xyz above the industry average of 57 —, 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. The token bloat ratio sits at a lean 2.2×, meaning the ratio of code to visible content is efficient — crawlers spend their token budget on actual information. Minimal structured data (1 block) limits the site's ability to communicate entity relationships to AI systems. Robots.txt grants unrestricted access to the key AI user-agents, which is the strongest starting position for AI visibility.

68
C — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Performance (22) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Monitor weekly to catch regressions early
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 25, 2026 · 📋 API
Does your site score higher than clarivate.xyz?
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)75 × 0.25 = 18.8
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)81 × 0.40 = 32.4
⚡ Performance (20% weight)22 × 0.20 = 4.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)83 × 0.15 = 12.4
Weighted sum = 18.8 + 32.4 + 4.4 + 12.4
Global SEODiff Score = 68 (C)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
53
Structure
avg 35
42
Schema
avg 10
85
Tech Stack
avg 64
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 50%+
Rank #702794
-64 pts
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 6%
Score 80/100

clarivate.xyz ranks much higher on Google (Tranco Top 50%+) than in AI search (Top 6%). This is the 'Invisible Giant' pattern — implement the patches above to close the AI gap. ACRI measures technical crawler readiness. Read the methodology →

Why clarivate.xyz ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industryeducation
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat2.2×

Fastest improvements

  • You’re already in decent shape — the next moat is monitoring drift over time.
  • 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

75/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

54 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

156 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✓ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 1
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 7
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — Clarivate - Leading Global Transformative Intelligence
  • ✓ og:description — Clarivate aims to fuel the world's greatest breakthroughs through enriched data, insights, analytics, workflow solutions and expert services. Find out more.
  • ✗ og:image
  • ✓ twitter:card — summary_large_image
📐 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

81/100 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 education sector, rndirectors.com (ACRI: 85) 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 →
clarivate.xyz
70
Your ACRI Score
85
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. rndirectors.com has schema coverage of 4 blocks and uses WordPress. 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 53/100 — Fair
Structured Elements 309 elements (309 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words3667
Raw Density8.4%

🏷️ Schema Health Docs

Organization Schema ✅ Present
Product / Service Schema ⚠️ Not Found
Total Schema Blocks1 block(s) — Basic (low value for AI)

Schema Coverage Map

3/7 schema types detected
✅ Organization
❌ Product/Service
❌ Breadcrumb
❌ FAQ
✅ Article
✅ WebSite
💡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.

📐 AI Efficiency Metrics Docs

71
AI Extractability
High
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability71/100 — AI models can easily extract answers from this page
Crawl CostHigh (80/100) — expensive for AI crawlers to process
Blocklist RiskNone — 0 of 5 AI crawlers blocked

Token Bloat Research

45%
🗑️ 55%
Useful Content (242.0 KB)Bloat (301.7 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio2.2× — Lean

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context100% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage44 / 44 images have alt text

TDM Rights

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

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

70 Entropy
Fair Token Bloat: Medium
Noise Ratio: 55.5% · SNR: 0.80 · Signal: 61955 / Noise: 77226 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…

🔧 Tech Stack

FrameworkWordPress
AI-Readiness Score85/100
Servernginx
CDN
HTTP Status200
Load Time4753 ms
Raw HTML Size543.7 KB
Visible Text Size242.0 KB

Performance & Speed

22/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

4753 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

2837
DOM nodes
544 KB
HTML payload
Heavy page — consider reducing DOM complexity

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✓ Cache-Control header → public, max-age=3600
  • ✗ CDN cache status
  • ✗ CDN detected

🔬 Tracker Tax

0
tracker scripts
0
third-party domains
0.0%
token overhead
Minimal tracker load — clean signal for bots
📐 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

83/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

  • ✗ Sitemap declared in robots.txt
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed
  • ✓ GPTBot allowed
  • ✓ ClaudeBot allowed

🔗 Linking

213
internal links
148
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 70/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for clarivate.xyz
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/clarivate.xyz" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=clarivate.xyz" 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.

🔗 Similar education Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
clarivate.xyz (this site) 70 80 WordPress 2.2× 1
clarivate.com 70 80 WordPress 2.2× 1 Compare →
mruni.eu 70 82 WordPress 2.1× 1 Compare →
janu.jp 70 90 WordPress 2.5× 1 Compare →
hofstra.edu 70 77 WordPress 1.7× 1 Compare →
usforacle.com 70 83 WordPress 2.7× 1 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

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 Clarivate?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Add your answer here — describe what Clarivate does in 1-2 sentences."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "How does Clarivate work?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Explain the key features and how users interact with Clarivate."
      }
    }
  ]
}
</script>
📈

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

If you apply the patches above, here's the estimated improvement for clarivate.xyz:

Current Score
80
Projected Score
83
Improvement
+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