cxtoday.com 72 B
🛡️ SEO 57 🤖 GEO 83 ⚡ Perf 62 🏗️ Arch 79

cxtoday.com — Global SEODiff Score 72/100

cxtoday.com
📊

Among all indexed domains, cxtoday.com ranks in the top echelon with an ACRI of 85, demonstrating that its content is highly visible to AI systems. Compared to other infrastructure sites (avg score: 57), cxtoday.com performs above the benchmark, suggesting strong competitive positioning in AI search. Its server-rendered architecture ensures AI crawlers receive complete HTML on first request, a key advantage for extractability. Token bloat registers at 10.0× — acceptable, but reducing inline scripts and redundant markup could yield measurable gains. Only 1 schema block is present — adding Organization, WebSite, and Breadcrumb schemas would significantly improve structured data coverage. All major AI bot user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, CCBot, Google-Extended) are permitted by robots.txt, ensuring broad AI crawler access.

72
B — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Traditional SEO (57) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Fix title tag length → +3 pts
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 26, 2026 · 📋 API
Does your site score higher than cxtoday.com?
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)57 × 0.25 = 14.2
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)83 × 0.40 = 33.2
⚡ Performance (20% weight)62 × 0.20 = 12.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)79 × 0.15 = 11.8
Weighted sum = 14.2 + 33.2 + 12.4 + 11.8
Global SEODiff Score = 72 (B)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
74
Structure
avg 35
42
Schema
avg 10
85
Tech Stack
avg 64
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 6%
Rank #63919
Aligned
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 2%
Score 85/100

cxtoday.com has balanced Google and AI visibility — both rank roughly in the same tier. ACRI measures technical crawler readiness. Read the methodology →

Why cxtoday.com ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat10.0×

Fastest improvements

  • 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

57/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

77 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

264 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✗ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 2
  • ✗ Has <h2> headings — found 0
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
  • ✓ og:description — Leading source for customer experience news covering contact center technology, AI agents, CRM platforms, customer analytics, and CX innovations. Expert insights on CCaaS, workforce management, marketing technology, and industry trends from top brands and leaders.
  • ✓ og:image — preview
  • ✓ 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

83/100 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 infrastructure sector, safely.co.jp (ACRI: 90) 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 →
cxtoday.com
64
Your ACRI Score
90
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. safely.co.jp has schema coverage of 3 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 74/100 — Good
Structured Elements 68 elements (68 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words416
Raw Density16.4%

🏷️ 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.
💡FAQ schema missing. Adding FAQPage schema lets AI models directly extract Q&A pairs for Featured Snippets and chatbot answers.

📐 AI Efficiency Metrics Docs

68
AI Extractability
Low
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability68/100 — AI models can partially extract answers from this page
Crawl CostLow (30/100) — efficient for AI crawlers to process
Blocklist RiskNone — 0 of 5 AI crawlers blocked

Token Bloat Research

10%
🗑️ 90%
Useful Content (8.2 KB)Bloat (73.7 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio10.0× — Normal

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context79% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage11 / 14 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: 90.0% · SNR: 0.11 · Signal: 2099 / Noise: 18868 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
Servercloudflare
CDNcloudflare
HTTP Status200
Load Time1359 ms
Raw HTML Size81.9 KB
Visible Text Size8.2 KB

Performance & Speed

62/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1359 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

473
DOM nodes
82 KB
HTML payload
Lean page — fast for bots and users

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✗ Cache-Control header
  • ✓ CDN cache status → DYNAMIC
  • ✓ CDN detected → cloudflare

🔬 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

79/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

  • ✓ Sitemap declared in robots.txt → http://www.cxtoday.com/sitemap_index.xml
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed
  • ✓ GPTBot allowed
  • ✓ ClaudeBot allowed

🔗 Linking

85
internal links
6
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-GB
  • ✓ 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 64/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for cxtoday.com
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/cxtoday.com" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=cxtoday.com" 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 10 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
64
Single-page score
-10
Moderate hidden bloat
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
54
Avg across 10 pages · Range 54–54
Total Words
2100
Avg Bloat
80.0×
Ext. Citations
3
Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://cxtoday.com/pricing
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
pricing 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/about
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
about 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/features
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
product 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/products
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
product 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/blog
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
blog 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/docs
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
docs 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/case-studies
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
social-proof 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/contact
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
support 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/faq
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
support 54 80.0× 210
https://cxtoday.com/integrations
CX Today | CX News | Customer Experience News, Technology & Industry Insights
integrations 54 80.0× 210
🔗
Outbound External Citations
3 unique external domains cited across 10 pages
youtube.com ×10
linkedin.com ×10
todaydigital.com ×10
🔄 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/cxtoday.com

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

🔗 Similar infrastructure Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
cxtoday.com (this site) 64 85 WordPress 10.0× 1
mowzo.ir 64 81 WordPress 10.0× 1 Compare →
cryptonewsus.com 64 84 WordPress 10.0× 1 Compare →
heysigmund.com 64 82 WordPress 10.0× 1 Compare →
usafis.org 64 80 WordPress 10.0× 1 Compare →
ordrecrha.org 64 77 WordPress 10.0× 1 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

If you apply the patches above, here's the estimated improvement for cxtoday.com:

Current Score
85
Projected Score
91
Improvement
+6 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