Comparing SEO audits over time without misleading yourself
How to compare two technical SEO audits fairly: like-for-like crawl settings, stable issue identity, new vs resolved vs not re-checked, and coverage changes.
White-label SEO reports
White-label SEO reports built from evidence, not templates
Turn any completed audit into a client-ready report with your agency’s branding. Choose the sections, add your notes and export PDF, a single self-contained HTML file or CSV.
Your agency’s name on every page
- Agency name, primary and secondary colours, website, contact email, phone, optional address, footer and confidentiality statement
- PNG or JPEG logo, checked by file contents (SVG and other formats are refused, so an uploaded file can never run code)
- Live preview of the printed cover before you save
- Colours too light to read on paper are used for accents only
- Each saved report keeps the branding it was created with
Seven optional sections
Pick an audit, a reporting period and the sections the client needs. A live preview updates as you go.
| Section | What it contains |
|---|---|
| Executive summary | Scope, crawl completeness, counts by severity, the most important findings, changes since the compared audit, next actions and limitations. Generated from the numbers, never claiming rankings, indexing or traffic the data doesn’t show. |
| Technical SEO | Crawl summary, HTTP status distribution, findings by severity and area, and the top root causes written out in full with evidence, affected URLs and the fix. |
| Broken-link priorities | One row per broken destination, with linking-page counts, example source pages and a flag when the start page links to it. |
| GEO readiness | AI crawler permissions by purpose, entity signals, author/publisher/source signals and page-level opportunities, with a statement that this is not a measurement of AI visibility. |
| AI visibility | Only manually recorded observations from the reporting period, each labelled as not independently verified. Without real observations, the section says so. |
| Historical comparison | New, resolved, still-present, first-seen and not-re-checked issues, status changes and coverage, with explanations when page limits or settings differ. |
| Recommended action plan | Fixes grouped by root cause, prioritised by fixed, documented rules (Critical → Informational), with a note field per action. |
Exports that travel safely
Printed from the browser (Chrome or Edge): branded cover, each section on a new page, repeated table headers, page numbers and your agency name in the footer. No paid PDF service.
Self-contained HTML
One file to email or attach: inline styles, embedded logo, mobile-friendly, no scripts, fonts, remote images or tracking pixels, and a Content-Security-Policy inside the file.
CSV
Findings by root cause, affected URLs, broken-link groups and recommended actions, protected against spreadsheet formula injection.
Immutable snapshots. A saved report never changes, even if you re-brand, run new audits or edit AI visibility data later. You can still edit its title, client notes and a note on each recommended action; notes sit next to the evidence and never alter it.
What it does not do
- No AI-written narrative. Wording is deterministic and generated from the data; add your own commentary in the client notes.
- Priorities are rule-based. They say nothing about business impact, which a crawler can’t measure.
- No scheduled report emails or client portal yet. You download and send reports yourself.
- No ranking or traffic data unless you add it in your notes.
Learn
Related guides
Technical SEO audit checklist: a practitioner’s workflow
A step-by-step technical SEO audit checklist: crawl setup, status codes, indexability, canonicals, sitemaps, internal links, structured data and hreflang.
Open a white-label report in the demo
See a branded monthly SEO & GEO report for a fictional client, built by a fictional agency.
SEO Sentinel is in private beta. Nothing is for sale yet and no card is ever requested.