forter.com 71 B
🛡️ SEO 67 🤖 GEO 80 ⚡ Perf 47 🏗️ Arch 85

forter.com — Global SEODiff Score 71/100

forter.com
📊

With a solid 71/100 ACRI, forter.com is well-positioned for AI search — better than 70% of sites in the Radar. Compared to other developer sites (avg score: 58), forter.com performs above the benchmark, 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 4.3×, 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.

71
B — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Performance (47) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Monitor weekly to catch regressions early
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 26, 2026 · 📋 API
📈 ACRI Trend 26 snapshots
Feb 21 Feb 26
🔔 Recent AI Indexing Activity
No recent changes detected by adaptive crawler.
Does your site score higher than forter.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)67 × 0.25 = 16.8
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)80 × 0.40 = 32.0
⚡ Performance (20% weight)47 × 0.20 = 9.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)85 × 0.15 = 12.8
Weighted sum = 16.8 + 32.0 + 9.4 + 12.8
Global SEODiff Score = 71 (B)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
35
Structure
avg 36
2
Schema
avg 9
85
Tech Stack
avg 63
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 0.1%
Rank #299
+30 pts
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 30%
Score 71/100

forter.com punches above its weight in AI — AI visibility exceeds Google ranking. This is a competitive moat worth protecting. ACRI measures technical crawler readiness. Read the methodology →

Why forter.com ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industrydeveloper
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat4.3×

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

67/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

47 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

140 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✓ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 1
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 3
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — Identity Intelligence for Digital Commerce
  • ✓ og:description — Forter is the leader in Identity Intelligence. We help brands stop fraud and approve more payments without compromising customer experience.
  • ✓ 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

80/100 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 →
forter.com
56
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 35/100 — Low
Structured Elements 62 elements (62 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words1726
Raw Density3.6%
💡Low structure score (35/100). Your content appears as a wall of text with few structured HTML elements. You have 62 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 ❌ Missing
Product / Service Schema ⚠️ Not Found
Total Schema Blocks1 block(s) — Basic (low value for AI)

Schema Coverage Map

2/7 schema types detected
❌ Organization
❌ Product/Service
✅ Breadcrumb
❌ FAQ
❌ Article
✅ WebSite
💡Organization schema missing. AI models cannot identify your brand entity. Without it, your brand won't appear in Knowledge Panels or be associated with your content.
💡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

56
AI Extractability
Medium
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability56/100 — AI models can partially extract answers from this page
Crawl CostMedium (50/100) — moderate for AI crawlers to process
Blocklist RiskNone — 0 of 5 AI crawlers blocked

Token Bloat Research

23%
🗑️ 77%
Useful Content (67.6 KB)Bloat (226.4 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio4.3× — Lean

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context14% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage19 / 136 images have alt text

TDM Rights

TDM-Reservation HeaderNot set
X-Robots-Tag: noaiNot set
💡Only 14% of images have alt text. Add descriptive alt attributes so multimodal AI (ChatGPT Vision) can understand your images.

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

17 Entropy
Poor Token Bloat: High
Noise Ratio: 77.0% · SNR: 0.30 · Signal: 17305 / Noise: 57951 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…
🧠

The LLM Interpretation

AI-VERIFIED

A local LLM (mlx-community/Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct-4bit) analyzed the extracted content of forter.com and produced this structured business intelligence. Fields marked SEMANTIC VOID indicate information the AI could not find — a critical gap in your site’s machine-readability.

Core Offering
Protects user data by collecting and using personal and anonymous data for business operations and marketing.
Target Audience
Website visitors, customers, partners, employees
Pricing Model
Not mentioned
🛡️ Compliance Standards
GDPR
🏆 Competitive Moat
Comprehensive data protection and privacy measures.
📊 Content Depth
5/10
🔄 Programmatic SEO Signals
Category pagesComparison pages
⚡ Key Pain Points
• No meta descriptions
• Thin content on category pages
Model: mlx-community/Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct-4bit · Analyzed: 2026-02-27 · Data extracted from the site’s main content via strict JSON prompting.

🔧 Tech Stack

FrameworkWordPress
AI-Readiness Score85/100
Servercloudflare
CDNcloudflare
HTTP Status200
Load Time1197 ms
Raw HTML Size294.0 KB
Visible Text Size67.6 KB

Performance & Speed

47/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1197 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

1304
DOM nodes
294 KB
HTML payload
Moderate weight — acceptable for most scenarios

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✓ Cache-Control header → max-age=600, must-revalidate
  • ✓ 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

85/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

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

🔗 Linking

104
internal links
3
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 56/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for forter.com
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/forter.com" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=forter.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 725 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
56
Single-page score
+2
Consistent readability
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
58
Avg across 725 pages · Range 22–85
Topical Cohesion
7%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
458200
Avg Bloat
126.2×
RAG Fractures [?]
657
⚠️
657 RAG-Chunking Fractures Detected

Poorly formatted tables or pricing grids on 657 pages will be split incorrectly during RAG chunking, causing AI models to hallucinate prices and features.

Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://www.forter.com/privacy-policy/
Website Privacy Policy – Forter
pricing 85 9.4× 3396 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/coronavirus-march-22/
Coronavirus Impact: E-Commerce & Fraud | Forter
pricing 72 18.4× 1887 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/preparing-for-psd2-exemptions/
Preparing For PSD2: Exemptions | Forter – Forter
pricing 72 17.1× 1977 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/understanding-the-2022-holiday-fraud-attack/
Understanding the 2022 Holiday Fraud Attack – Forter
pricing 72 18.0× 1872 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/why-fraud-fighters-are-rethinking-3ds/
Why Fraud Fighters Are Rethinking 3DS – Forter
pricing 72 19.3× 1692 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/from-the-fraudsters-mouth-refunding/
From the Fraudster’s Mouth: Refunding – Forter
pricing 72 17.7× 1911 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/trusted-agentic-commerce-protocol/
Proposing a Trusted Agentic Commerce Protocol – Forter
pricing 72 19.6× 1795 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/web-authentication-is-broken/
Web Authentication is Broken – Forter
pricing 72 18.0× 2042 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/terms-of-use/
Terms of Use – Forter
pricing 72 17.0× 1646 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/lsa/
Loyalty Fraud Trends: Stories from LSA's Spring Conference
pricing 67 36.7× 887 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/myth-busters-scores-reason-codes/
Myth Busting: You need scores or reason codes for transparency – Forter
pricing 67 37.3× 845 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/the-threat-of-mobile-fraud/
Mobile Fraud Protection | Fraud Prevention for Mobile
pricing 67 24.5× 1329 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/why-your-business-needs-fraud-analytics/
Why Your Business Needs Fraud Analytics – Forter
pricing 67 39.2× 805 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/resellerabuse/
How Reseller Abuse Negatively Impacts Retailers’ Customer Experience – Forter
pricing 67 25.9× 1267 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/forter-named-a-top-workplace-on-fortunes-2022-best-workplaces-in-ny/
Forter Named a Top Workplace on Fortune’s 2022 Best Workplaces in NY – Forter
pricing 67 30.3× 1105 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/the-new-trust-equation-agents-abuse-and-the-future-of-retail/
The New Trust Equation: Agents, Abuse, and the Future of Retail – Forter
pricing 67 28.2× 1142 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/agentic-orchestration/
Unlocking Agentic Commerce for Enterprise Merchants with Forter – Forter
pricing 67 28.6× 1129 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/getting-the-most-out-of-3ds-in-the-u-s/
Getting the Most Out of 3DS in the U.S. – Forter
pricing 67 29.9× 1066 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/fraud-protection-information-security-hidden-risk/
Fraud Protection and Information Security Risks – Forter
pricing 67 33.0× 964 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://www.forter.com/blog/2015-09-why-luxury-retailers-cant-afford-fraud-prevention-thats-only-average/
Fraud Prevention For Luxury Retailers – Forter
pricing 67 28.5× 1160 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
Showing 20 of 100 pages. Unlock full subpage table →
📂
Health by Sub-Directory
Average ACRI and top issues aggregated by URL path prefix
Path Pages Avg ACRI Ghost % Bloat Top Issue
/blog/ 442 65 0% 42.8× High JS Bloat
/de/ 11 55 0% 85.9× High JS Bloat
/competitors/ 5 54 0% 67.0× High JS Bloat
/platform/ 3 64 0% 62.6× High JS Bloat
/impact/ 3 63 0% 32.7× High JS Bloat
/cn/ 3 57 0% 61.1× High JS Bloat
/platform-old/ 1 64 0% 68.1× High JS Bloat
/smart-payments/ 1 54 0% 70.7× High JS Bloat
/fraud-insights/ 1 54 0% 116.5× High JS Bloat
/smart-claims/ 1 54 0% 101.3× High JS Bloat
/responsible-ai-commitment/ 1 67 0% 27.8× High JS Bloat
/ai/ 1 54 0% 76.2× High JS Bloat
/faq/ 1 54 0% 230.7× High JS Bloat
/trusted-authorization/ 1 54 0% 126.8× High JS Bloat
/adobe-commerce/ 1 54 0% 119.0× High JS Bloat
🔄 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/forter.com

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

🔗 Similar developer Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
forter.com (this site) 56 71 WordPress 4.3× 1
askbart.org 81 84 WordPress 2.6× 1 Compare →
esmile-24.com 81 84 WordPress 2.2× 1 Compare →
randstad.es 80 88 WordPress 4.9× 4 Compare →
shiawasegift.com 80 89 WordPress 5.0× 5 Compare →
premium303.com 81 90 WordPress 4.8× 5 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🎭

Bait & Switch Delta

A 15 PAGES

Compares your homepage rendering quality with inner pages. A high drift score means AI crawlers see a polished homepage but degraded inner content — the "bait & switch" that erodes trust.

31
Homepage ACRI
45
Inner Avg ACRI
-14
ACRI Delta
60%
Homepage Ghost
41%
Inner Avg Ghost
0
Drift Score [?]
Worst Inner Pages
41 60% pricing https://www.forter.com/cn/pricing/
51 60% pricing https://www.forter.com/de/pricing/
31 60% pricing https://www.forter.com/pricing/
🛡️

E-E-A-T Trust Signals

F 10/100

Trust indicators extracted from surface pages. These signals help AI systems verify your site's Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness.

Physical Address
Phone Number
Email Contact
About Page
Contact Page
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Named Leadership
Named leadership: Yuji Itoh, Forter Team, Yuji Itoh
🔗

Citation Profile

12 DOMAINS

Outbound citation patterns across surface-crawled pages. Sites that cite diverse, authoritative sources signal higher E-E-A-T to AI systems.

106
Total Links
12
Unique Domains
7.1
Avg/Page
11%
Diversity
docs.forter.com linkedin.com hello.forter.com instagram.com support.forter.com portal.forter.com x.com facebook.com twitter.com resources.forter.com
🏘️ Outbound Neighborhood Trust Avg Trust: 45.8

AI trust scores for the domains forter.com links to. Citing high-trust sources lifts your own credibility signal.

🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Add Organization JSON-LD
High Impact ⏱ 5 min
AI models cannot identify your brand entity without Organization schema. This is the #1 fix for AI visibility.
html
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Organization",
  "name": "Forter",
  "url": "https://forter.com",
  "logo": "https://www.forter.com/wp-content/themes/blank/img/favicon/faviconV2.png?t=1750098596",
  "sameAs": []
}
</script>
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 Forter?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Add your answer here — describe what Forter does in 1-2 sentences."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "How does Forter work?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Explain the key features and how users interact with Forter."
      }
    }
  ]
}
</script>
📈

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

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

Current Score
71
Projected Score
83
Improvement
+12 pts
Add Organization schema +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