Site Health, Issues and Page Tracker

These three tabs are three views over one thing: the deep full-site crawl. The crawl runs every two weeks, and everything on these tabs comes from its most recent pass. You never run them separately.

• Site Health: how the site is doing overall, and the trend
• Issues: everything that's wrong, grouped by problem
• Page Tracker: everything, page by page

Same data, three questions: how are we doing, what's broken, what about this page.

Site Health

The top of the tab is your overall score with a breakdown behind it: technical, content, SEO, GEO and E-E-A-T. Below that sit authority signals: your domain authority, plus internal authority, which measures how well link equity flows through your own site.

There's a speed card showing average mobile and desktop scores from the crawl's Core Web Vitals sample. For a specific page's speed, use the Page Tracker. The sample is there to tell you whether the site is broadly fast, not to diagnose one URL.

Re-run audit triggers a fresh crawl on demand rather than waiting for the schedule.

📸 Screenshot slot: site-health-hero.png
The Site Health hero with a real overall score and the dial breakdown visible.

Issues

The thing worth understanding about this tab: it's sorted by whether a fix is worth your time, not by how alarming it sounds.

Issues are grouped into three bands:

"Safe to skip" is collapsed by default, and that's the point. Most SEO tools list every deviation from an ideal at equal weight, so you get 400 red flags and no idea which three matter. Verand calibrates the verdict first and lets severity recede. A title that's four characters over a soft limit is not the same problem as a missing title, even though both are "title length."

Issues are grouped by check type, not by page, so you see "34 pages missing a meta description" as one row rather than 34 separate ones. Each row carries specific guidance on what to do and why it matters. Where a fix can be applied automatically, the row says so.

Every issue falls into one of five categories: technical, content, GEO, authority, or compliance.

You can dismiss an issue you've judged irrelevant, and it stays dismissed rather than returning on the next crawl.

📸 Screenshot slot: issues-bands.png
The Issues tab with all three bands visible and "Safe to skip" collapsed, so the prioritisation is obvious at a glance.

Page Tracker

One row per page, with its scores, its issues and its status. This is where you go when you have a specific page in mind rather than a specific problem.

It's also where on-demand speed testing lives. Run Core Web Vitals against any page, as often as you like, with no allowance attached. That's the counterpart to the crawl's six-page sample: the crawl tells you whether the site is fast, the Page Tracker tells you whether this page is.

📸 Screenshot slot: page-tracker-table.png
The Page Tracker with a populated table, ideally with a range of scores so it doesn't read as uniformly green.

How Issues differs from Opportunities

These two tabs look similar and answer different questions.

Issues is about correctness. It's exhaustive: everything wrong with the site, whether or not fixing it will move a number.

Opportunities is about leverage. It's curated: a prioritised worklist of things where there's evidence of upside.

The same page can appear on both, and where that happens each tab marks the crossover. A missing answer block might be an issue on 49 pages, but an opportunity only on the three where Search Console says you're close to winning a featured snippet.

Rule of thumb: work Opportunities when you have an hour and want impact. Work Issues when you want the site to be correct.