form.io 74 B
🛡️ SEO 65 🤖 GEO 83 ⚡ Perf 47 🏗️ Arch 100

form.io — Global SEODiff Score 74/100

form.io
📊

form.io shows strong AI visibility with an ACRI of 77/100, outperforming 86% of indexed domains. Within the developer vertical, this places form.io above the industry average of 57 —, 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. With a 4.7× bloat ratio, the page delivers its content without excessive boilerplate, giving AI systems a clean extraction path. Structured data coverage is solid at 2 blocks, covering core entities — expanding to include FAQ or Breadcrumb schemas could strengthen the profile further. All major AI bot user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, CCBot, Google-Extended) are permitted by robots.txt, ensuring broad AI crawler access.

74
B — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Performance (47) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Fix title tag length → +3 pts
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 25, 2026 · 📋 API
Does your site score higher than form.io?
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)65 × 0.25 = 16.2
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)83 × 0.40 = 33.2
⚡ Performance (20% weight)47 × 0.20 = 9.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)100 × 0.15 = 15.0
Weighted sum = 16.2 + 33.2 + 9.4 + 15.0
Global SEODiff Score = 74 (B)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
36
Structure
avg 35
44
Schema
avg 10
85
Tech Stack
avg 64
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 13%
Rank #125330
Aligned
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 14%
Score 77/100

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

Why form.io ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industrydeveloper
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage2 blocks
Token bloat4.7×

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

65/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

110 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

160 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✗ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 5
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 23
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — The Self-Hosted Developer Productivity Platform for Building Forms and APIs Within Your Applications - Form.io
  • ✓ og:description — Form.io is a zero-trust, data governance platform with a UI/UX layer and is embedded in your environment via Docker so that complex connections are made simple.
  • ✓ 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 developer sector, hikkoshizamurai.jp (ACRI: 88) 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 →
form.io
63
Your ACRI Score
88
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. hikkoshizamurai.jp has schema coverage of 5 blocks and uses Custom / Proprietary. 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 36/100 — Low
Structured Elements 84 elements (84 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words2112
Raw Density4.0%
💡Low structure score (36/100). Your content appears as a wall of text with few structured HTML elements. You have 84 list items, 0 table rows, 0 table headers. Convert features into <ul> lists and data into <table> elements to help AI models extract structured information.

🏷️ Schema Health Docs

Organization Schema ✅ Present
Product / Service Schema ⚠️ Not Found
Total Schema Blocks2 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

67
AI Extractability
Low
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability67/100 — 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

21%
🗑️ 79%
Useful Content (32.3 KB)Bloat (118.9 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio4.7× — Lean

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context100% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage123 / 123 images have alt text

TDM Rights

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

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

8 Entropy
Poor Token Bloat: High
Noise Ratio: 78.6% · SNR: 0.27 · Signal: 8261 / Noise: 30428 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 Time1136 ms
Raw HTML Size151.1 KB
Visible Text Size32.3 KB

Performance & Speed

47/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1136 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

1279
DOM nodes
151 KB
HTML payload
Moderate weight — acceptable for most scenarios

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✓ Cache-Control header → public, max-age=0, s-maxage=3600
  • ✓ CDN cache status → HIT
  • ✓ 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

100/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

  • ✓ Sitemap declared in robots.txt → https://form.io/sitemap_index.xml
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed
  • ✓ GPTBot allowed
  • ✓ ClaudeBot allowed

🔗 Linking

73
internal links
12
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 63/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for form.io
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/form.io" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=form.io" 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 7 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
63
Single-page score
+2
Consistent readability
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
66
Avg across 7 pages · Range 44–75
Topical Cohesion
9%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
6707
Avg Bloat
29.7×
RAG Fractures
7
Ext. Citations
13
⚠️
7 RAG-Chunking Fractures Detected

Poorly formatted tables or pricing grids on 7 pages will be split incorrectly during RAG chunking, causing AI models to hallucinate prices and features.

Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://form.io/faq
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) - Form.io
support 75 10.5× 1927 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/pricing
Configuration Based Pricing - Form.io
pricing 72 19.2× 1322 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/features
Form.io Features - Form.io
product 72 15.5× 1341 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/about
About Form.io - Form.io
pricing 67 24.0× 706 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/case-studies
Case Studies - Form.io
social-proof 67 31.3× 643 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/blog
Blog - Form.io
blog 64 32.4× 590 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://form.io/contact
Contact Form.io - Form.io
support 44 74.9× 178 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
🔗
Outbound External Citations
13 unique external domains cited across 7 pages
portal.form.io ×7
gitter.im ×7
form-talent.freshteam.com ×7
instagram.com ×7
github.com ×7
help.form.io ×7
youtube.com ×7
saasworthy.com ×7
🔄 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/form.io

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

🔗 Similar developer Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
form.io (this site) 63 77 WordPress 4.7× 2
bdata.at 63 79 WordPress 4.6× 2 Compare →
andreyex.ru 63 73 WordPress 4.4× 2 Compare →
globaldots.com 63 79 WordPress 4.2× 2 Compare →
socialnetworking.solutions 63 79 WordPress 4.2× 2 Compare →
advancedinstaller.com 62 79 WordPress 4.7× 2 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

If you apply the patches above, here's the estimated improvement for form.io:

Current Score
77
Projected Score
83
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