hubspot.de 66 C
🛡️ SEO 60 🤖 GEO 83 ⚡ Perf 34 🏗️ Arch 76

hubspot.de — Global SEODiff Score 66/100

hubspot.de
📊

hubspot.de shows strong AI visibility with an ACRI of 79/100, outperforming 91% of indexed domains. Compared to other infrastructure sites (avg score: 58), hubspot.de performs above the benchmark, suggesting strong competitive positioning in AI search. A ghost ratio of 15% indicates a mixed rendering strategy where core content loads server-side but interactive sections rely on JavaScript. A 9.2× bloat ratio is typical for sites in this tech tier — not wasteful, but streamlining could further boost extractability. 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.

66
C — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Performance (34) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Monitor weekly to catch regressions early
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 26, 2026 · 📋 API
Does your site score higher than hubspot.de?
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)60 × 0.25 = 15.0
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)83 × 0.40 = 33.2
⚡ Performance (20% weight)34 × 0.20 = 6.8
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)76 × 0.15 = 11.4
Weighted sum = 15.0 + 33.2 + 6.8 + 11.4
Global SEODiff Score = 66 (C)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
94
Rendering
avg 93
69
Structure
avg 36
42
Schema
avg 9
50
Tech Stack
avg 63
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 7%
Rank #65809
Aligned
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 9%
Score 79/100

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

Why hubspot.de ranks here

Tech stackCustom / Proprietary
RenderingHybrid
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat9.2×

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

60/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

63 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

142 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✓ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 1
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 40
  • ✗ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

  • ✓ Canonical tag present → https://www.hubspot.de
  • ✓ No noindex directive
  • ✓ Meta viewport set
  • ✓ HTML lang attribute → de
  • ✓ Hreflang tags
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed by robots.txt

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — HubSpot | Software & Tools für Ihr Unternehmen – Startseite
  • ✓ og:description — Die Plattform von HubSpot umfasst die gesamte Marketing-, Vertriebs-, Support- und CRM-Software, die für das Unternehmenswachstum nötig ist.
  • ✓ 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 →
hubspot.de
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 15%
0% — Safe 50% 100% — Risk
Status Server-Side Rendered (Safe)
Rendering Type Hybrid

📊 Structure & Information Density Docs

Structure Grade 69/100 — Good
Structured Elements 323 elements (323 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words2232
Raw Density14.5%

🏷️ Schema Health Docs

Organization Schema ✅ Present
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
💡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

66
AI Extractability
High
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability66/100 — AI models can partially extract answers from this page
Crawl CostHigh (70/100) — expensive for AI crawlers to process
Blocklist RiskNone — 0 of 5 AI crawlers blocked

Token Bloat Research

10%
🗑️ 90%
Useful Content (77.2 KB)Bloat (631.4 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio9.2× — Normal

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context35% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage35 / 99 images have alt text

TDM Rights

TDM-Reservation HeaderNot set
X-Robots-Tag: noaiNot set
💡Only 35% of images have alt text. Add descriptive alt attributes so multimodal AI (ChatGPT Vision) can understand your images.

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

0 Entropy
Poor Token Bloat: High
Noise Ratio: 89.1% · SNR: 0.12 · Signal: 19766 / Noise: 161636 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

AI-Readiness Score50/100
Servercloudflare
CDNcloudflare
HTTP Status200
Load Time1309 ms
Raw HTML Size708.6 KB
Visible Text Size77.2 KB

Performance & Speed

34/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1309 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

2775
DOM nodes
709 KB
HTML payload
Heavy page — consider reducing DOM complexity

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✓ Cache-Control header → no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate
  • ✓ CDN cache status → DYNAMIC
  • ✓ CDN detected → cloudflare

🔬 Tracker Tax

5
tracker scripts
1
third-party domains
0.0%
token overhead
Moderate trackers — consider lazy-loading non-essential scripts
hubspot.com
📐 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

76/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

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

🔗 Linking

210
internal links
32
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 → de
  • ✓ 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 hubspot.de
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/hubspot.de" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=hubspot.de" 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 4 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
64
Single-page score
-12
Moderate hidden bloat
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
52
Avg across 4 pages · Range 22–67
🔍
Hidden Bloat Detected

Homepage scores 64, but internal pages average only 52 — a -12-point gap. Blogs, docs, and legacy content are dragging down AI readability site-wide.

Topical Cohesion
5%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
4095
Avg Bloat
807.3×
RAG Fractures [?]
3
⚠️
3 RAG-Chunking Fractures Detected

Poorly formatted tables or pricing grids on 3 pages will be split incorrectly during RAG chunking, causing AI models to hallucinate prices and features.

Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://hubspot.de/products
Alle Produkte & Funktionen | HubSpot
pricing 67 48.4× 2997 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://hubspot.de/integrations
HubSpot Marketplace
pricing 64 178.7× 565 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://hubspot.de/case-studies
Sammlung von Case Studies | HubSpot
pricing 56 232.7× 529 ⚠️ RAG Fracture
https://hubspot.de/pricing
Preisübersicht | HubSpot Marketing
pricing 22 2769.4× 4 💰 Pricing
📂
Health by Sub-Directory
Average ACRI and top issues aggregated by URL path prefix
Path Pages Avg ACRI Ghost % Bloat Top Issue
/case-studies/ 1 56 0% 232.7× High JS Bloat
/pricing/ 1 22 1% 2769.3× Bot Blocked
/products/ 1 67 0% 48.4× High JS Bloat
/integrations/ 1 64 0% 178.7× 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/hubspot.de

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

🔗 Similar infrastructure Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
hubspot.de (this site) 64 79 Custom / Proprietary 9.2× 1
violinsetc.com 89 86 Custom / Proprietary 2.2× 1 Compare →
pubsandclubs.com.au 86 87 Custom / Proprietary 4.9× 4 Compare →
churchfind.com.au 86 87 Custom / Proprietary 4.9× 4 Compare →
kondela.hu 86 93 Custom / Proprietary 3.1× 4 Compare →
kruizinga.nl 87 93 Custom / Proprietary 3.0× 5 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

If you apply the patches above, here's the estimated improvement for hubspot.de:

Current Score
79
Projected Score
85
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