Run this technical SEO checker on your homepage instantly below - no signup. Then crawl every page for indexability, canonicals, hreflang, structured data, sitemaps and more. Find the technical issues holding your rankings back.
Instant, free, no account needed - homepage checked on the spot.
We separate indexable from non-indexable pages and check each correctly - so your report reflects what Google actually sees.
Noindex pages, canonical-to-redirect, canonical changes over time, and pages that became non-indexable.
Missing reciprocal hreflang, language mismatches, broken hreflang, missing self-reference, html lang.
JSON-LD schema errors plus Google-style missing-field warnings that block rich results.
Non-canonical URLs in your sitemap, pages missing from it, deep pages, too many links, orphan pages.
Redirect chains, broken redirects, HTTP→HTTPS issues, redirected pages with no incoming links.
Missing HSTS, mixed content, broken images and broken JavaScript references.
Kalenux operates 10+ production websites in 15+ languages. This checker is the exact engine we use to keep them technically clean - now available for yours.
These are the issues that quietly cost rankings. Here's what each one means and how to fix it.
A stray noindex on a shared template, or a Disallow in robots.txt, can deindex a whole section silently. Grep your built output for noindex and make sure it only appears where you intend (thank-you pages, internal search). In Search Console, the Pages report tells you exactly what is indexed and why the rest isn't.
Every page should self-reference its canonical unless you deliberately point elsewhere. The common bug: a canonical that targets a redirect or a 404 - Google ignores those and picks its own URL. After any HTTP→HTTPS or trailing-slash change, re-check that every canonical resolves to a live 200 page.
Your sitemap is a list of "please index these." If it contains redirected, non-canonical, or 404 URLs, you send mixed signals and waste crawl budget. It should contain only canonical, indexable, 200-status URLs - and be declared in robots.txt.
Collapse redirect chains (A→B→C should be A→C) and fix redirects that land on a 404. Broken internal links waste crawl budget and leak authority. Watch for orphan pages - pages with zero internal links - which Google struggles to find and value.
Invalid JSON-LD doesn't just fail to help - it can throw errors in Search Console and block rich results. A frequent one is putting aggregateRating on an object type that doesn't support it. Validate every schema block.
Every hreflang annotation needs a reciprocal return tag and a self-reference, must not point at redirected URLs, and the html lang attribute should match. Hreflang is the single most error-prone area of technical SEO - we built a dedicated hreflang checker for it.
A technical SEO checker crawls your website and tests it against the technical best practices search engines rely on: indexability, canonical tags, hreflang, structured data, sitemaps, redirects, broken links and page speed. Rather than scoring one page in isolation, it reports what is broken across the whole site so you can fix the issues that quietly hold rankings back. Most of those issues produce no visible symptom for a human visitor, which is precisely why they persist.
Run a full crawl after any deploy that touches templates, redirects, canonicals or the sitemap, and at least monthly otherwise. Technical problems are nearly always introduced by a change rather than appearing on their own, so auditing immediately after a release catches regressions while the cause is still obvious and cheap to reverse.
No subscription is required to do this work properly. Search Console and PageSpeed Insights are free, and Screaming Frog's free tier crawls up to 500 URLs, which is enough for a small site. For whole-site crawls without a monthly bill, Kalenux SEO Audit runs the full checklist plus PageSpeed for one-time credits ($9-49) that never expire.
Technical fixes remove what stops pages from ranking: deindexed pages, broken canonicals, slow load times, invalid schema. They do not invent demand for your topic, and they will not lift a page that nobody is searching for.
What they do guarantee is that the content you already have can be crawled, indexed and ranked on its merits. It is the foundation the rest of SEO sits on, and no amount of content or link work compensates for a page Google is not allowed to index.
Technical SEO checkers come in three shapes, and they are not interchangeable. Which one you need depends entirely on whether the fault you are chasing lives on a page or in the relationship between pages.
Paste a URL, get the status code, the meta robots directive, the canonical target, the title and description, the heading structure. This is the right tool when you have a specific page that is not ranking and you want to know whether something obvious is blocking it. It is instant, it needs no account, and it answers the question in seconds.
Its limit is structural rather than a matter of depth. A single-page check cannot tell you that this page is one of four hundred sharing the same title, that nothing internally links to it, or that it is excluded from your sitemap. Those facts do not exist on the page. They exist in the comparison between pages, and no per-URL tool can see them.
Crawling follows internal links from a starting point and records every page it reaches, which turns the site into a dataset you can query. That is what makes duplicate titles, orphan pages, broken internal links, redirect chains and inconsistent canonicals findable at all. Each of these is defined by a relationship, so each is invisible one URL at a time.
A crawl also gives you the denominator that makes counts meaningful. Two hundred pages with a missing meta description is a different problem on a 250-page site than on a 40,000-page one, and without the total there is no way to tell which you have.
An extension shows you the tags on the page you are currently viewing, which is genuinely useful while you are working on that page. What it cannot do is check a page you are not looking at, compare pages against each other, or keep a record of what changed since last month. It is a magnifying glass, not a survey.
The practical pattern most people land on is to use all three for what each is good at: an extension while editing, a single-page check to confirm a fix took effect, and a full crawl on a schedule to catch what neither of the first two can see.
Free single-page checks are common because they are cheap to run: one request, some parsing, a result. Free site-wide crawling is rarer, because a crawl of ten thousand pages is ten thousand requests plus storage plus processing, and that cost scales with your site rather than with the tool.
That is why free tiers usually cap either the number of URLs, the crawl frequency, or the history you can keep. When comparing tools, the cap that matters is whichever one your site is about to hit: a 500-URL limit is irrelevant on a 200-page site and immediately blocking on a 5,000-page one.
Read the mechanics behind a check, or run the next tool on the same site.
Read the guide
The complete checklist this tool automates.
The high-impact errors a technical audit should catch first.
How technical health frees crawl budget for your important pages.
Run another check
Free to start. Crawl your site and get a scored report.
Check my technical SEO