Overview
Website Summary
Based on search results our AI analysed your site and provided top line comments about the site content indexed in Google.
Overview of charlestaylor.com
Competitors
Content Gap
We are utilising data from SEO like Ahrefs to conduct a comprehensive analysis of top competing domains the content gap between your domain and its top 10 competitors.
Top 5 Detailed Actions to Maximise Organic Traffic
Here are the five most important detailed actions to increase organic traffic:
- Analyse the page load speed and performance optimisations of our domain compared to the competitors, especially focusing on those with a higher Domain Rating (DR) and current traffic, such as lloyds.com and swissre.com.
- Review and enhance the quality and relevance of our content to improve the keyword rankings, targeting keywords where our competitors, like crawco.co.uk and morganclark.co.uk, have a strong overlap and better performance.
- Optimise the website’s structure and navigation, reducing the number of pages if necessary to streamline the user experience and improve the crawl efficiency, similar to the page reduction seen with lloyds.com.
- Improve our backlink profile by targeting high-quality and relevant backlinks to increase our Domain Rating (DR), drawing inspiration from domains such as naic.org which have a substantial DR and positive traffic change.
- Investigate and implement conversion rate optimisation (CRO) strategies used by competitors like propertyclaimassist.co.uk who have shown a significant increase in traffic value, to maximise the value of our current traffic.
Top 10 Competitors
Domain | Rank | Competitor’s Keywords | Common Keywords | Share | Current Traffic |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
lloyds.com | 1 | 8852 | 62 | 0.60% | 19324 |
crawco.co.uk | 2 | 505 | 39 | 4.20% | 1004 |
swissre.com | 3 | 4991 | 35 | 0.60% | 2849 |
morganclark.co.uk | 4 | 865 | 31 | 2.40% | 1786 |
harrisbalcombe.com | 5 | 450 | 29 | 3.40% | 1161 |
propertyclaimassist.co.uk | 6 | 490 | 27 | 3% | 993 |
naic.org | 7 | 3781 | 21 | 0.40% | 1875 |
airmic.com | 8 | 1284 | 20 | 1.10% | 1310 |
medical-air-service.com | 9 | 3994 | 20 | 0.40% | 6769 |
mgaa.co.uk | 10 | 2049 | 18 | 0.70% | 3560 |
Speed
Top 5 Quick Wins
We run your site through Google PageSpeed Insights and evaluated the performance of a web page on both mobile and desktop devices, here are the biggest gains and suggestions on how to improve page load times.
URL: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=https://charlestaylor.com/
Based on the performance analysis data, here are the five most important actions to be taken to gain the most speed for the website:
Eliminate Render-Blocking Resources: Delaying the rendering of the page, render-blocking resources like CSS and JavaScript can significantly affect the load time. Potential savings of 2,080 ms could be achieved by deferring the loading of such resources or inlining critical resources to reduce round-trip requests.
Reduce JavaScript Execution Time: Currently at 3.3 s, optimising and reducing JavaScript execution time can lead to better performance. This could involve breaking up long-running tasks, optimising algorithms, and removing or deferring non-critical scripts.
MinimiSe Main-Thread Work: With 5.4 s of work currently on the main thread, breaking up tasks and optimising the code can reduce the time it takes to execute tasks on the main thread, thereby reducing the time to become interactive.
Serve Images in Next-Gen Formats: By serving images in formats like JPEG 2000, JPEG XR, or WebP instead of traditional formats, the site could potentially save 1,630 KiB. These formats often provide better compression and quality characteristics compared to their older counterparts.
Reduce Initial Server Response Time: The root document currently takes 610 ms to respond, which can be improved by optimising the server configuration, using a Content Delivery Network (CDN), and caching strategies.
By implementing these actions, Charles Taylor can significantly improve their website’s loading times, providing a better user experience, particularly on mobile devices where speed is a critical factor.
SEO
Issues to fix
Analysing current on page SEO here’s a list of top issues which should be addressed
Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.
SEO Opportunities
Issue Name | Issue Type | Issue Priority | URLs % of Total | Description | How To Fix |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Canonicals: Missing | Warning | Medium | 100 | Pages that have no canonical URL present either as a link element, or via HTTP header. | Specify a canonical URL for every page to avoid any potential ranking unpredictability. |
Page Titles: Duplicate | Opportunity | Medium | 60.61 | Pages which have duplicate page titles. | Update duplicate page titles as necessary, so each page contains a unique and descriptive title. |
H1: Missing | Issue | Medium | 47.64 | Pages which have a missing H1, the content is empty or has a whitespace. | Ensure important pages have concise, descriptive and unique H1 headings. |
Content: Low Content Pages | Opportunity | Medium | 24.76 | Pages with a word count below the default 200 words. | Consider including additional descriptive content to better understand the page. |
Page Titles: Below 30 Characters | Opportunity | Medium | 25.71 | Pages which have page titles under the configured limit. | Consider updating the page title to include additional target keywords or USPs. |
Images: Over 100 KB | Opportunity | Medium | 11.93 | Large images over a size threshold. | Ensure images are optimised with compression, properly scaled, and using the best image format. |
H1: Multiple | Warning | Medium | 5.66 | Pages which have multiple H1s. | Consider updating the HTML to include a single H1 on each page. |
Page Titles: Over 60 Characters | Opportunity | Medium | 5.42 | Pages which have page titles that exceed the configured limit. | Write concise page titles to ensure important words are not truncated. |
Page Titles: Over 561 Pixels | Opportunity | Medium | 5.19 | Pages which have page titles over Google’s estimated pixel length limit for titles. | Write concise page titles to ensure important words are not truncated. |
Page Titles: Below 200 Pixels | Opportunity | Medium | 8.96 | Pages which have page titles much shorter than Google’s estimated pixel length limit. | Consider updating the page title to take advantage of the space left to include additional keywords. |
Hosting
External Review
We analysed your environments to check for any common problems.
Security
List of security assessment results and recommendations following a external preliminary Vulnerability Scan.
Test Description | Vulnerability | Risk Level | Risk Description | Recommendation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Insecure cookie setting: missing Secure flag | CWE-614 | Medium | Since the Secure flag is not set on the cookie, the browser will send it over an unencrypted channel (plain HTTP) if such a request is made, leading to the risk of interception and unauthorised access. | Ensure that the secure flag is set for cookies containing sensitive information. |
Insecure cookie setting: missing HttpOnly flag | CWE-1004 | Medium | A cookie without the HttpOnly flag can be accessed by JavaScript, which increases the risk of session hijacking if an XSS attack occurs. | Ensure that the HttpOnly flag is set for all cookies. |
Vulnerabilities found for server-side software | CWE-1026 | Medium | The existence of vulnerabilities in server-side software could lead to unauthorised access and denial of service attacks. | Upgrade the affected software to the latest version to mitigate these vulnerabilities. |
Missing security header: Referrer-Policy | CWE-693 | Low | Lack of a Referrer-Policy header could lead to inadvertent information leakage and user tracking. | Configure the Referrer-Policy header on the server to avoid these risks, ideally using the no-referrer option. |
Missing security header: Content-Security-Policy | CWE-693 | Low | Without a CSP header, the application is more vulnerable to XSS attacks. | Set the Content-Security-Policy header with the appropriate directives for the application. |
Missing security header: X-Content-Type-Options | CWE-693 | Low | Lack of X-Content-Type-Options header may permit MIME type sniffing, leading to XSS or phishing attacks. | Implement the X-Content-Type-Options header with the value nosniff. |
Missing security header: Strict-Transport-Security | CWE-693 | Low | Not having a Strict-Transport-Security header could allow an attacker to downgrade connections to HTTP, which is unsafe. | Ensure that the Strict-Transport-Security header is sent with each HTTPS response and has a sufficiently long max-age. |
Please note that the results are preliminary and may contain false positives.
Shared Hosting Detected
List of domains hosted on the same server:
This table includes the domain names and their last resolved dates, extracted from the provided data. The full data contains 14 domains, but only a few are shown here for brevity.
Domain Name | Last Resolved |
---|---|
charlestaylor.com | 2024-01-16 |
charlestayloradj.com | 2024-01-08 |
charlestayloradjusting.com | 2024-01-08 |
charlestaylortpa.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctaam.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctadjustingusa.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctcplc.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctinsuretech.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctplc.com | 2024-01-08 |
ctservicesltd.com | 2024-01-08 |
cttechnical.co.uk | 2023-10-08 |
krris.com | 2024-01-08 |
metrorm.com | 2024-01-08 |
rhlg.com | 2024-01-08 |
In the context of web hosting, particularly for businesses, opting for dedicated hosting can be a significant decision. Dedicated hosting provides an exclusive server for a single client, which means that the client does not share the server’s resources with any other users. This exclusivity can lead to enhanced performance, security, and control—factors that are crucial for businesses that rely on their online presence for operations and revenue.
The importance of dedicated hosting for business reasons includes:
- Performance: With dedicated hosting, businesses can expect improved website loading times due to the availability of dedicated resources. This can be particularly important for sites that experience high traffic volumes or require significant processing power.
- Security: Dedicated servers can offer stronger security measures since the business has complete control over the server’s security protocols. This can be critical for companies that handle sensitive data.
- Customisation: Businesses have the flexibility to customise the server environment to their specific needs, including the operating system, software, and configurations.
- Reliability: Since the server is not shared, there are fewer chances of downtime caused by other websites’ traffic spikes or technical issues.
On the other hand, shared hosting, where multiple clients share the resources of a single server, can pose several risks:
- Resource Limitation: Websites on shared hosting may experience slower performance due to the shared resources among numerous clients.
- Security Concerns: If one website on a shared server is compromised, there is a potential risk for other sites on the same server to be affected.
- Limited Control: Clients have limited ability to install custom software or make server configuration changes, which can be restrictive for businesses with specific needs.
- IP Blacklisting: If one of the websites on a shared server engages in malicious or spammy behavior, it could lead to the server’s IP being blacklisted, affecting all websites hosted on that server.
Search engines and web services may consider the type of hosting as a factor when assessing a website’s credibility and reliability. While dedicated hosting is generally not directly referenced as a ranking factor by major search engines like Google, the indirect benefits such as faster loading times, better uptime, and enhanced security can contribute positively to SEO rankings.