This sample shows three real findings from work on our own website, partstradeai.com. The changes were made on 19 October 2026. We checked the saved before-and-after files against our current site copy again on 24 October.
It is a short example of how we record and verify findings, not a client case study or a complete paid SEO audit. We have not measured a ranking, enquiry or revenue gain attributable to these changes.
What this sample covers
We selected the homepage background image, the English pricing-page title and page structure on four design demonstrations. Each finding has an identifiable location, evidence of the original condition, a specific correction and a check of the resulting files. This sample does not assess every page or establish the overall health of the website.
1. A large homepage background image
The original background file was 2,330,313 bytes. Its replacement is 185,966 bytes, with the same 1,586 × 992 pixel dimensions. That is about 92% less data for this image alone.
We compressed the image and changed the homepage stylesheet to use the smaller WebP file. For the recheck, we measured both saved files, confirmed their dimensions and checked the old and new stylesheet references. The original file also matches the fingerprint recorded before the repair.
This verifies a smaller asset. It does not mean the whole page loads 92% faster, and it does not establish a change in search position.
2. A pricing title that described an older offer
The English pricing page still used “Auto Parts Website Pricing · Parts Trade Web Studio”. The page had already broadened to business websites across industries.
We changed the title to “Business Website Pricing · Parts Trade Web Studio”. The corrected title is present in both the saved release and the current site copy. The main address identified for the page remains our pricing page.
The correction makes the page description match its offer. It does not prove that Google will display that exact title or that more searchers will click it.
3. Two targets with the same name
Four design-demo pages each had two elements named top. We removed the extra name from the page body, leaving one intended destination for the existing #top links.
The recheck found one target per page and retained the same links. These demonstrations were already excluded from search indexing. This was a page-structure correction, not a technique for improving their rankings.
What you should expect from a report
A useful finding should make the next action clear without overstating the result. Ask for the affected page, supporting evidence, proposed change, responsible person and a way to verify completion. Findings that still need investigation should say so.
Our SEO Audit service explains the agreed scope and deliverables. The audit cost guide explains how to compare a report-only quote with one that includes implementation.
Download these three findings (CSV) · Download a blank audit worksheet (CSV)