integrityline.com 70 B
🛡️ SEO 67 🤖 GEO 78 ⚡ Perf 47 🏗️ Arch 83

integrityline.com — Global SEODiff Score 70/100

integrityline.com
📊

With an ACRI of 86/100, integrityline.com stands out as one of the highest-performing sites in AI search visibility, outranking 99% of its peers. In the government sector, integrityline.com outperforms the average (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. Token bloat registers at 12.4× — acceptable, but reducing inline scripts and redundant markup could yield measurable gains. Minimal structured data (1 block) limits the site's ability to communicate entity relationships to AI systems. The site maintains an open-door policy for AI crawlers — GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and other major agents are all allowed.

70
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 26, 2026 · 📋 API
Does your site score higher than integrityline.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)78 × 0.40 = 31.2
⚡ Performance (20% weight)47 × 0.20 = 9.4
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)83 × 0.15 = 12.4
Weighted sum = 16.8 + 31.2 + 9.4 + 12.4
Global SEODiff Score = 70 (B)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
79
Structure
avg 35
42
Schema
avg 10
85
Tech Stack
avg 64
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 2%
Rank #20162
Aligned
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 1%
Score 86/100

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

Why integrityline.com ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industrygovernment
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat12.4×

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

74 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

164 chars
Too long

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✓ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 1
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 4
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — EQS Integrity Line - the secure whistleblowing hotline | integrityline.com
  • ✓ og:description — Comply with the EU Whistleblower Directive - with EQS Integrity Line, the most trusted whistleblowing hotline in the EU. ✓ Certified ✓ Secure ✓ GDPR compliant
  • ✓ 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

78/100 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 government sector, gep.com (ACRI: 83) 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 →
integrityline.com
71
Your ACRI Score
83
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. gep.com has schema coverage of 3 blocks and uses Drupal. 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 79/100 — Good
Structured Elements 188 elements (188 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words1014
Raw Density18.5%

🏷️ Schema Health Docs

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

Schema Coverage Map

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

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

8%
🗑️ 92%
Useful Content (20.1 KB)Bloat (228.8 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio12.4× — Normal

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context43% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage18 / 42 images have alt text

TDM Rights

TDM-Reservation HeaderNot set
X-Robots-Tag: noaiNot set
💡Only 43% 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: 91.9% · SNR: 0.09 · Signal: 5140 / Noise: 58565 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 Time1384 ms
Raw HTML Size248.8 KB
Visible Text Size20.1 KB

Performance & Speed

47/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1384 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

1390
DOM nodes
249 KB
HTML payload
Moderate weight — acceptable for most scenarios

🗄️ Cache & CDN

  • ✗ Cache-Control header
  • ✗ 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 → https://www.integrityline.com/sitemap_index.xml
  • ✓ Googlebot allowed
  • ✓ GPTBot allowed
  • ✓ ClaudeBot allowed

🔗 Linking

152
internal links
17
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
  • ✓ 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 71/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for integrityline.com
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/integrityline.com" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=integrityline.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 5 pages · Deep-10

Homepage ACRI
71
Single-page score
-7
Moderate hidden bloat
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
64
Avg across 5 pages · Range 54–69
Topical Cohesion
18%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
3075
Avg Bloat
92.0×
Ext. Citations
14
Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://integrityline.com/about
About EQS Group: The European compliance champion
about 69 58.0× 648
https://integrityline.com/features
EQS Integrity Line - Features at a glance | integrityline.com
product 69 49.8× 836
https://integrityline.com/blog
EQS Integrity Line - the secure whistleblowing hotline | integrityline.com
blog 69 65.2× 782
https://integrityline.com/contact
EQS Integrity Line: Contact | integrityline.com
support 59 132.9× 319
https://integrityline.com/case-studies
Compliance Case Studies - A look inside the companies | EQS Group
pricing 54 153.8× 490 💰 Pricing
🔗
Outbound External Citations
14 unique external domains cited across 5 pages
eqsgroup.integrityline.com ×5
linkedin.com ×5
eqs.com ×5
facebook.com ×5
instagram.com ×5
youtube.com ×5
xing.com ×5
twitter.com ×5
🔄 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/integrityline.com

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

🔗 Similar government Sites

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

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
integrityline.com (this site) 71 86 WordPress 12.4× 1
capgemini.com 71 80 WordPress 11.9× 1 Compare →
bostonmutual.com 70 84 WordPress 12.3× 1 Compare →
lmc.org 72 83 WordPress 12.0× 1 Compare →
capgemini.fi 70 80 WordPress 11.9× 1 Compare →
mendix.com 73 90 WordPress 12.0× 1 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Reduce Token Bloat
Medium Impact ⏱ 1–2 hrs
Only 8% of your HTML is useful content. AI crawlers waste context window tokens on bloat.
html
<!-- Move inline CSS to external stylesheets -->
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/css/main.css">

<!-- Move inline scripts to external files with defer -->
<script src="/js/app.js" defer></script>

<!-- Remove duplicate navigation blocks -->
<!-- Keep only ONE <nav> in the <header> -->

<!-- Ensure <main> wraps your primary content -->
<main>
  <!-- Your content here — this is what AI sees first -->
</main>
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 Integrityline?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Add your answer here — describe what Integrityline does in 1-2 sentences."
      }
    },
    {
      "@type": "Question",
      "name": "How does Integrityline work?",
      "acceptedAnswer": {
        "@type": "Answer",
        "text": "Explain the key features and how users interact with Integrityline."
      }
    }
  ]
}
</script>
📈

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

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

Current Score
86
Projected Score
94
Improvement
+8 pts
Reduce token bloat +5 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