opensource.org
Ranked #171 of 300 on the Leaderboard. Analyzed .
Index Quotient
71.74
Technical Health
97.53Whether search engines can fetch, trust, and quickly load the site.
Strengths
- CrawlabilityStrong
Crawlers are welcome here: a sitemap points the way, links work, and pages are allowed into the index.
- SpeedStrong
Pages load quickly, and the server answers fast.
- URL and canonical hygieneStrong
URLs are clean and consistent, each page has one address, and missing pages say so.
Opportunities
- Secure connectionPartial
The connection is encrypted but not fully hardened: steering every visit onto it and sending the standard security headers would finish the job.
Content Quality
68.74Whether pages say clearly what they are about, in a form machines can read.
Strengths
- FreshnessStrong
Something here was published or updated recently, and the site says when.
- LanguageStrong
The page language is declared and matches what is on the page.
Opportunities
- Depth and readabilityPartial
Pages have substance, but many stop short, drift from their titles, or read harder than they need to.
- Titles and descriptionsPartial
Titles are mostly in place; descriptions and link previews are patchier, and each page wants ones of its own.
- Images and linksPartial
Pages link to one another, though some images lack a description and some link text says "read more" rather than where it leads.
Answer Readiness
37.40Whether content is shaped and marked up so an engine can lift a direct answer.
Strengths
- Navigation aidsStrong
Interior pages show where they sit in the site, and say so in a way engines can read.
Opportunities
- Structured dataMissing
Pages carry no structured data, so nothing tells an engine what each one is; marking up the page type, and the site's name, is the first step here.
- Question-and-answer shapeWeak
Few pages are shaped as questions and answers, so there is little for an answer engine to lift as a direct answer.
- Scannable formattingPartial
Pages are partly scannable; opening with a short summary, and putting facts in lists and tables, makes them easier to lift from.
AI Visibility
70.58Whether AI systems can reach, read, and confidently identify the site.
Strengths
- AI accessStrong
AI crawlers are allowed in, and pages may be quoted in AI answers.
- FeedsStrong
The site offers a feed, and its sitemap says when pages last changed.
Opportunities
- IdentityWeak
Little here says who is behind the site, in the markup or on the pages themselves.
- Readable without JavaScriptPartial
Most content is readable without running scripts, but some pages arrive thin, or the content is not clearly marked out from the furniture around it.
- Authorship and sourcingPartial
Some articles say who wrote them and when, and some pages cite sources; the rest should say so too.
Authority
84.44Whether the wider web vouches for the site.
Strengths
- BacklinksStrong
Plenty of other sites link here, including ones that matter.
- TrafficStrong
The site has a large audience.
- Domain historyStrong
The domain has a long history, and history counts.
Opportunities
Nothing here to work on. The points left are the ones only the web's largest sites earn.
Nearby on the Leaderboard
- #170
linuxfoundation.org71.82
- #171
opensource.org71.74
- #172
lmu.de71.72
Scores reflect what IndexBot could read from opensource.org's available pages on .