plos.org
Ranked #54 of 300 on the Leaderboard. Analyzed .
Index Quotient
79.77
Technical Health
91.80Whether 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.
- URL and canonical hygieneStrong
URLs are clean and consistent, each page has one address, and missing pages say so.
- Safe to visitStrong
Nothing marks this site as unsafe to visit.
Opportunities
- SpeedPartial
Pages load reasonably but not quickly, so visitors wait longer than they need to.
- 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
72.78Whether pages say clearly what they are about, in a form machines can read.
Strengths
- HeadingsStrong
Each page has one main heading, with subheadings in a sensible order beneath it.
- 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
63.61Whether content is shaped and marked up so an engine can lift a direct answer.
Strengths
- Structured dataStrong
Pages carry structured data of the kinds engines use, filled in properly, and the site says its own name in it.
- Navigation aidsStrong
Interior pages show where they sit in the site, and say so in a way engines can read.
Opportunities
- Question-and-answer shapeMissing
No page poses a question and answers it directly beneath, which is the shape answer engines look for; adding those pages is where this starts.
- 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
82.00Whether 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.
- IdentityStrong
It is clear who is behind this site, on its pages, in its markup, and in the public record.
Opportunities
- Authorship and sourcingPartial
Some articles say who wrote them and when, and some pages cite sources; the rest should say so too.
- 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.
- FeedsPartial
Either a feed or sitemap dates are in place, not both; machines that watch for new content want both.
Authority
88.68Whether 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
- #53
arstechnica.com79.80
- #54
plos.org79.77
- #55
imperial.ac.uk79.61
Scores reflect what IndexBot could read from plos.org's available pages on .