Service
SEO services
Fix what stops pages being found, then build the pages worth finding.
SEO splits into three jobs that are usually done by three different people badly: making the site crawlable and indexable, making pages that answer a real query better than the ones currently ranking, and proving which of the two moved the number. We do all three, in that order, because publishing into a site search engines cannot read is expensive and slow.
300%
more organic impressions in six months
20% average improvement
The problem
Where does SEO effort usually leak away?
Into pages search engines cannot read, canonicals pointing somewhere wrong, and publishing volume with no intent map, so your own pages compete with each other.
The most common failure is not a ranking problem, it is an indexing problem. Pages that render their content in the browser rather than on the server look empty to everything except Google, and even Google renders them on a queue. AI answer engines never render at all, so a client-rendered page is invisible to them entirely.
The second most common failure is a canonical pointing somewhere wrong. Google treats a canonical tag as a strong signal and a sitemap entry as a weak one, so a template that hardcodes the canonical to the homepage tells Google every page is a duplicate, and it outvotes everything you did right.
The third is publishing volume without intent mapping. Twenty posts targeting the same query compete with each other, and the site ends up with twenty pages that each rank slightly worse than one good page would have.
Scope
What do SEO services cover?
Technical audit, site architecture, keyword and intent mapping, on-page and content work, structured data that describes real content, and Core Web Vitals as engineering.
Diagnosis before prescription, every time.
Technical audit
Crawl and index coverage, robots and sitemap correctness, canonical logic, redirect chains, status code hygiene, and a raw versus rendered comparison that shows exactly what a non-rendering crawler sees on each template.
Site architecture
URL structure, internal linking that passes authority to the pages meant to earn it, and the hub and spoke relationships that stop your own pages competing for the same query.
Keyword and intent mapping
One primary intent per URL, documented, so nobody writes the twenty-first post about the same thing. This is the artefact that prevents most future SEO waste.
On-page and content
Titles, headings, and body copy written for the query and the reader rather than for a density target. Existing pages are usually rewritten before new ones are commissioned.
Structured data
Schema that describes what is genuinely on the page. We do not mark up ratings or reviews that do not exist, which is a manual action waiting to happen, not a shortcut.
Core Web Vitals
Layout stability, largest contentful paint, and interaction latency treated as engineering work with a measurable before and after, not as a score to chase.
Process
How does an SEO engagement run?
Crawl and diff raw against rendered HTML, triage findings by root cause, map intent per URL, ship fixes, then read results over quarters.
Crawl and diff
We crawl the site the way a search engine does and diff the raw HTML against the rendered DOM. That single check surfaces the issues that quietly cap everything else.
Triage by cause
Fifty findings usually share three causes: one template, one rewrite rule, one unrendered shell. We fix causes and watch the findings close in batches.
Map intent
Every existing URL gets a primary intent, and every gap gets a decision: write, rewrite, merge, or leave it.
Ship and verify
Fixes are verified in the built artefact and on the live URL, not just in the source, because a correct fix behind a stale cache is not yet a fix.
Measure over quarters
SEO reporting on a weekly cadence mostly measures noise. We report monthly and read trends quarterly, against impressions and query coverage rather than a rank tracker average.
Coverage
What does the audit behind this work look at?
Every engagement opens with the audit, and these are the first of the areas it reads before anyone recommends a single change.
Crawlability and indexation
What search engines can reach, what they have actually indexed, and the gap between the two. Nothing else on this list matters on a page that cannot be crawled or has been quietly excluded.
Site architecture and internal linking
Whether the structure concentrates authority on the pages that need it or spreads it evenly across pages that do not. Internal linking is the lever most sites own outright and least often use.
Technical health
Status codes, redirects and redirect chains, canonicals and pagination. These are the faults that silently subtract from a site rather than announcing themselves in a report.
Core Web Vitals and page experience
Measured on real pages rather than a template sample, and separated into what genuinely affects rankings and what only affects the score in a testing tool.
Mobile parity
Whether the mobile version carries the same content, links and structured data as the desktop one. Indexing is mobile-first, so anything missing on mobile is effectively missing.
On-page elements and metadata
Titles, descriptions, heading structure and the alignment between what a page is optimised for and what it actually says.
- 10 further areas are covered on the audit page.
All 16 are listed on the SEO audit services page.
Deliverables
What do you receive?
A technical audit ranked by impact and effort, a raw versus rendered report per template, an intent map covering every indexable URL, and monthly reporting.
- A technical audit with findings ranked by impact and effort
- A raw versus rendered report per page template
- A keyword and intent map covering every indexable URL
- Structured data implemented and validated
- Prioritised fix list, with the ones we can implement marked as such
- Monthly reporting on coverage, queries, and the pages that moved
Start with the audit
SEO audit
What we read before recommending any of this, and what it covers. There is a free version if you would rather start there.
Related reading
A technical SEO audit checklist that finds real problems
The long-form version of the thinking behind this service.
Related services
- Content marketing services
Fewer pieces, each aimed at one question, each measured.
- Marketing analytics services
Measurement you can act on, and an honest account of what it cannot tell you.
Before you brief anyone
- What this kind of work costs
Third-party benchmark data, named and dated. We publish no rate card and the pages say why.
- Whether an agency is the right model at all
Agency against in-house and against a freelancer, each reaching a recommendation rather than a pitch.
- What is different in your vertical
Platform policy constraints, conversion definition problems and negative keyword themes by industry.
- What your own numbers support
Calculators for target cost per lead, in-house cost against an agency, and whether you can test at all.
Questions
What do buyers ask about SEO services?
How long it takes, whether rankings can be guaranteed, whether another audit helps, whether their framework hurts them, and how this relates to AI citations.
How long does SEO take to work?
Technical fixes can change indexing within days to weeks. Content and authority work is measured in quarters. We tell you which category a given recommendation falls into, so nothing is sold on a timeline it cannot meet.
Do you guarantee first page rankings?
No, and neither can anyone else. Nobody controls the ranking system. What we can commit to is that the site will be crawlable, indexable, correctly canonicalised, and targeting one clear intent per page, which is the part that is actually within our control.
Is an SEO audit worth it if we already have one?
Only if the last one was acted on. Most audits we are shown were delivered as a list of two hundred findings with no root cause analysis and no owner. If you have one of those, the useful next step is triage rather than another audit.
Does our JavaScript framework hurt SEO?
The framework does not, the rendering strategy does. Server-rendered or statically generated pages are fine. Pages that ship an empty shell and fill it in the browser are the problem, and Google is explicit that server-side or static rendering is the fix rather than dynamic rendering workarounds.
How does SEO relate to getting cited by AI answer engines?
They share most of the same requirements. Answer engines need server-rendered content, clear headings, and specific checkable claims. The one real difference is that they never run JavaScript, so a page that Google eventually renders is a page they simply never see.
Start with an audit
Send us what you are running. We will tell you what we would look at first in SEO, and whether it is the right place to start at all.