itape.com 73 B
🛡️ SEO 73 🤖 GEO 82 ⚡ Perf 39 🏗️ Arch 91

itape.com — Global SEODiff Score 73/100

itape.com
📊

itape.com shows strong AI visibility with an ACRI of 83/100, outperforming 97% of indexed domains. In the government sector, itape.com outperforms the average (58), 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. A tight 3.4× token bloat ratio reflects disciplined markup: minimal noise between the crawler and the content it needs. 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.

73
B — Global SEODiff Score
Comprehensive search visibility assessment
Strong foundations, but Performance (39) is your bottleneck.
🎯 Top Fix: Monitor weekly to catch regressions early
🔬 Automated SEODiff Assessment · Snapshot: Feb 25, 2026 · 📋 API
📈 ACRI Trend 2 snapshots
Feb 23 Feb 25
🔔 Recent AI Indexing Activity
No recent changes detected by adaptive crawler.
Does your site score higher than itape.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)73 × 0.25 = 18.2
🤖 AI Readiness / GEO (40% weight)82 × 0.40 = 32.8
⚡ Performance (20% weight)39 × 0.20 = 7.8
🏗️ Architecture & Trust (15% weight)91 × 0.15 = 13.7
Weighted sum = 18.2 + 32.8 + 7.8 + 13.7
Global SEODiff Score = 73 (B)
📊 ACRI Sub-Scores (AI Readiness Detail)
100
Bot Access
avg 92
100
Rendering
avg 93
68
Structure
avg 36
42
Schema
avg 9
85
Tech Stack
avg 63
🔀
Visibility Delta: Google vs AI
Google (Tranco)
Top 45%
Rank #447807
-41 pts
Gap
AI (ACRI)
Top 3%
Score 83/100

itape.com ranks much higher on Google (Tranco Top 45%) than in AI search (Top 3%). This is the 'Invisible Giant' pattern — implement the patches above to close the AI gap. ACRI measures technical crawler readiness. Read the methodology →

Why itape.com ranks here

Tech stackWordPress
Industrygovernment
RenderingSSR
Schema coverage1 blocks
Token bloat3.4×

Fastest improvements

  • You’re already in decent shape — the next moat is monitoring drift over time.
  • 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

73/100 25 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

📝 Title Tag

57 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 30–60 characters for SERP display.

📋 Meta Description

136 chars
Good length

Optimal range: 120–160 characters for snippet control.

🔤 Heading Hierarchy

  • ✗ Exactly 1 <h1> tag — found 7
  • ✓ Has <h2> headings — found 3
  • ✓ <h2> not before <h1>

🔍 Indexability

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

🌐 Social / OpenGraph

  • ✓ og:title — Home
  • ✓ og:description — Explore IPG's innovative packaging solutions, including automation machines and products designed for efficiency in all packaging needs.
  • ✗ og:image
  • ✓ 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

82/100 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, lancom-systems.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 →
itape.com
73
Your ACRI Score
83
Industry Peer ACRI
AI models prioritize pages with strong semantic structure and schema coverage. lancom-systems.com has schema coverage of 1 blocks and uses TYPO3. 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 68/100 — Good
Structured Elements 473 elements (473 lists, 0 rows, 0 headers)
Total Words3388
Raw Density14.0%

🏷️ 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

76
AI Extractability
Medium
Crawl Cost
None
Blocklist Risk
Extractability76/100 — AI models can easily 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

29%
🗑️ 71%
Useful Content (87.8 KB)Bloat (213.3 KB)
Token Bloat Ratio3.4× — Lean

Multimodal Readiness

Visual Context86% Optimized for Vision
Image Alt Coverage104 / 121 images have alt text

TDM Rights

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

🔥 Structural Entropy Check Research

40 Entropy
Poor Token Bloat: High
Noise Ratio: 70.8% · SNR: 0.41 · Signal: 22489 / Noise: 54607 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 Time1017 ms
Raw HTML Size301.2 KB
Visible Text Size87.8 KB

Performance & Speed

39/100 20 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

⏱️ Time to First Byte

1017 ms
Slow — bots may time out or deprioritise

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

📦 Page Weight

1813
DOM nodes
301 KB
HTML payload
Heavy page — consider reducing DOM complexity

🗄️ Cache & CDN

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

🔬 Tracker Tax

1
tracker scripts
1
third-party domains
0.0%
token overhead
Minimal tracker load — clean signal for bots
googletagmanager.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

91/100 15 % of Global Score 🟢 High Confidence

🗺️ Sitemap & Robots

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

🔗 Linking

508
internal links
23
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 73/100. Reach 80+ to unlock the green "AI-Verified" badge. Fix the issues below to improve your score.

AI-Verified badge for itape.com
Pending Audit — score below 80 threshold
<a href="https://seodiff.io/radar/domains/itape.com" rel="noopener"><img src="https://seodiff.io/api/v1/badge?domain=itape.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
73
Single-page score
-23
Severe hidden bloat
Δ delta
Site-Wide ACRI
51
Avg across 5 pages · Range 37–67
🔍
Hidden Bloat Detected

Homepage scores 73, but internal pages average only 51 — a -23-point gap. Blogs, docs, and legacy content are dragging down AI readability site-wide.

Topical Cohesion
4%
Topical Drift
TF-IDF cosine similarity
Total Words
2051
Avg Bloat
1161.4×
Page Type ACRI Token Bloat Words Status
https://itape.com/products
Products - IPG
product 67 86.0× 842
https://itape.com/about
About Us - IPG
about 57 144.4× 453
https://itape.com/blog
Blog - IPG | iTape
blog 56 123.9× 707
https://itape.com/case-studies
Case Studies - IPG
social-proof 37 3456.8× 19
https://itape.com/contact
Contact Us - IPG
support 37 1995.9× 30
📂
Health by Sub-Directory
Average ACRI and top issues aggregated by URL path prefix
Path Pages Avg ACRI Ghost % Bloat Top Issue
/products/ 1 67 0% 86.0× High JS Bloat
/about/ 1 57 0% 144.4× High JS Bloat
/blog/ 1 56 0% 123.9× High JS Bloat
/contact/ 1 37 0% 1995.9× High JS Bloat
/case-studies/ 1 37 0% 3456.8× High JS Bloat
🔗
Outbound External Citations
0 unique external domains cited across 5 pages
facebook.com ×5
anthem.com ×5
instagram.com ×5
youtube.com ×5
twitter.com ×5
linkedin.com ×5
play.google.com ×5
apple.co ×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/itape.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 itape.com. Compare side-by-side.

Domain ACRI AI Score Tech Stack Token Bloat Schema
itape.com (this site) 73 83 WordPress 3.4× 1
academy.versa-networks.com 79 86 WordPress 3.1× 1 Compare →
qualitestgroup.com 78 88 WordPress 3.5× 2 Compare →
muskegon-mi.gov 78 88 WordPress 5.2× 1 Compare →
wwwilliams.com 78 90 WordPress 11.0× 1 Compare →
enfuce.com 78 83 WordPress 3.5× 6 Compare →
Compare All 5 Similar Sites →
🩹

Remediation Patches

COPY-PASTE

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

Projected Impact

ROI EST.

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

Current Score
83
Projected Score
86
Improvement
+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