Technical SEO Services
Crawl, rendering, speed, and indexation fixed at the code level, so the content you already publish stops hitting an invisible ceiling.
Technical SEO services are the audit and repair of the infrastructure that decides whether search engines can crawl, render, and index a site. Egochi fixes crawl waste, indexation errors, Core Web Vitals failures, and JavaScript rendering gaps for businesses from local firms to enterprise catalogs, so content can compete on merit.
Content cannot outrank a crawl problem. The audit finds your ceiling.
As Featured In
What are technical SEO services?
Technical SEO services diagnose and fix the infrastructure problems that stop search engines from crawling, rendering, and indexing a website: crawl budget waste, duplicate URLs, broken redirects, slow Core Web Vitals, and JavaScript content Google never sees. The work sits underneath content and links. When the foundation is broken, both underperform no matter how well they are done.
Egochi has been fixing sites for search since 2014, from offices in New York, Miami, Milwaukee, and Madison, with 250+ Google reviews and 190+ Clutch reviews at a 5.0 rating behind the work. Technical work here is not a separate department: the same SEO specialists who run rankings campaigns read the crawls and the logs, so fixes get prioritized by revenue impact, not by whatever a tool flags red. The next step costs nothing: a free technical audit that names your ceiling before you spend a dollar.
The Three Pillars of Technical SEO
Every technical problem lands in one of three buckets. The audit checks all three, because a site can be perfect in two and still capped by the third.
-
Crawlability
Can Googlebot reach every page that matters?
Crawl budget is finite. When bots spend it spinning on faceted navigation, parameter URLs, and duplicates, the pages that earn revenue get discovered late or never.
- XML sitemap accuracy against the real URL set
- Robots.txt directives, tested, not assumed
- Redirect chain and loop cleanup
- Internal linking depth to money pages
- Orphan page discovery and reconnection
- Parameter and facet control on large catalogs
-
Indexability
Will Google keep the page once it finds it?
Canonical confusion, leftover noindex tags, and near-duplicate URLs quietly keep pages out of the index, or let junk in that dilutes everything else.
- Canonical tag audit across templates
- Duplicate URL consolidation (www, slashes, parameters)
- Noindex and robots directive review
- Pagination and filter handling
- Index bloat cleanup, pattern by pattern
- Search Console exclusion reasons, categorized
-
Renderability and performance
Can Google see what a browser sees, fast?
JavaScript-heavy stacks, slow servers, and failing Core Web Vitals mean the crawler renders less than your visitors get, and ranks what it rendered.
- Raw HTML vs rendered DOM comparison
- Core Web Vitals fixes at the code level
- Server response time and caching
- Render-blocking script and style removal
- Mobile content parity for mobile-first indexing
- Lazy loading that does not hide content from bots
What the Technical Audit Covers
A crawl-tool export is not an audit. The audit reads the crawl, the logs, and Search Console together, because each one lies a little on its own.
-
Crawl analysis
A full site crawl mapped against your sitemap and internal links: what exists, what is reachable, and what only a bot with infinite patience would ever find.
-
Index coverage review
Search Console data on indexed versus excluded pages, with every exclusion reason categorized and the fixable ones priced by impact.
-
Core Web Vitals, field vs lab
Real-user CrUX data beside Lighthouse lab runs, per template type, because passing the lab while failing real visitors is the most common page speed illusion.
-
JavaScript rendering test
Raw HTML compared against the rendered DOM on every template, to find the content, links, and structured data Google may never see.
-
Structured data validation
Schema checked for validity, rich result eligibility, and the rule that matters most: markup must match what is visibly on the page.
-
Log file analysis
Server logs showing what Googlebot actually requested, on sites large or tangled enough to justify it. Smaller sites get told they do not need this.
-
Redirects and status codes
Chains, loops, soft 404s, and 5xx patterns documented request by request, because every extra hop slows discovery and leaks authority.
-
Sitemaps and robots.txt
What you are submitting versus what you should be: stale URLs out, canonical URLs in, directives that block nothing they should not.
-
Hreflang, where it applies
International sites get return-tag and language-code validation. Sites with one language and one region get this line skipped, not billed.
Core Web Vitals, Without the Mythology
Google grades page experience on three field metrics, and its published thresholds are public: 2.5 seconds for Largest Contentful Paint, 200 milliseconds for Interaction to Next Paint, and 0.1 for Cumulative Layout Shift, each measured at the 75th percentile of real visits.
-
Largest Contentful Paint
How long the main content takes to appear. The usual culprits are oversized images, slow server response, and render-blocking assets. The fixes: modern image formats and compression, preloading the hero asset, and cutting time to first byte.
Good: 2.5 seconds or less
-
Interaction to Next Paint
How quickly the page responds when someone taps or clicks. Long JavaScript tasks blocking the main thread are almost always the cause. The fixes: deferring non-critical scripts and breaking up heavy event handlers.
Good: 200 milliseconds or less
-
Cumulative Layout Shift
How much the layout jumps around while loading. Images without dimensions, late-loading fonts, and injected banners cause it. The fixes: reserved space for every asset and fonts loaded before first paint.
Good: 0.1 or less
The distinction that catches most site owners: lab data and field data disagree. Lab data is a Lighthouse simulation run on demand from a fast machine. Field data is what real Chrome users experienced, aggregated over the trailing 28 days Google collects, and field data is what Google grades on. A site can pass every lab test and still fail in the field, because its real visitors sit on mid-range phones and cellular connections.
We hold ourselves to the same standard. This site is built to pass Google’s published thresholds, and that is a checkable claim, not a slogan: run this page’s URL through PageSpeed Insights and read the field and lab numbers yourself.
Log File Analysis Shows What Googlebot Actually Does
Crawl tools simulate what could happen. Server logs record what did.
A crawler like Screaming Frog shows what a bot could reach from your homepage. Your server log files show what Googlebot actually requested: which URLs, how often, what response codes came back, and where its limited attention went instead of your money pages. The two pictures rarely match, and the gap between them is where rankings quietly leak.
- How often Googlebot really visits the pages that make you money, versus the parameter URLs and archives it burns visits on
- Orphan URLs still collecting bot hits long after the last internal link to them was removed
- 5xx server errors that only happen under load, at hours when nobody is watching a dashboard
- Redirect chains slowing discovery, one extra request at a time
- Which crawlers reach you at all: Googlebot, Bingbot, and now the AI search crawlers
That last one matters more each year: the same logs show whether GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot can reach your content at all. Being readable to answer engines is its own visibility problem, and our AI SEO service works that side of it.
Honest scope note: on a site under a few thousand URLs, log analysis is usually overkill. The crawl and Search Console tell the same story for less money. It earns its cost on large catalogs, JavaScript-heavy stacks, and sites with indexing gaps nothing else explains.
How long does technical SEO take to show results?
Faster than content or links. Crawl and indexation fixes usually show in Search Console within 30 to 60 days: fewer errors, more pages indexed, quicker discovery of new content. Ranking movement follows in roughly 60 to 90 days, because Google has to recrawl and re-evaluate the fixed pages. Core Web Vitals field data updates on a rolling window of 28 days, the collection period Google uses.
Our Technical SEO Process, Built on VERTEX Search™
Technical engagements run the same 18-step framework as our full SEO programs, compressed into five technical moves that follow its stages: Discover, Structure, Create, Validate, Amplify.
-
Discover
Full Technical Audit
Site crawl, Search Console history, Core Web Vitals field data, site architecture map, and logs where the site justifies them, read together. The deliverable is a prioritized fix list priced by revenue impact, including what we recommend leaving alone.
-
Structure
Crawl and Index Repair
Robots.txt directives, redirect chains, canonical tags, parameter handling, and sitemap rebuilds. Orphan pages get reconnected or retired. The goal is simple: every crawl visit lands on a URL that deserves it.
-
Create
Rendering, Speed, and Schema
Core Web Vitals fixed at the code level, not with another plugin. JavaScript rendering gaps closed with server-side rendering or pre-rendering where needed. Structured data added where it matches visible content, and only there.
-
Validate
Recrawl Verification
Fixes get proven, not assumed: rendered DOM re-compared against raw HTML, rich result tests re-run, and Search Console watched as Google recrawls. Whatever did not move gets rediagnosed instead of redeclared done.
-
Amplify
Monitoring and Regression Alerts
Scheduled crawl comparisons, Core Web Vitals field tracking, and log reviews on large sites, with a monthly plain-number report. Regressions get caught in days, while they are still one template edit to undo.
VERTEX Search™ is the search discipline inside the EGOCHI VERTEX™ Growth System, the operating system behind every Egochi engagement.
How much does technical SEO cost?
A standalone technical SEO audit runs $2,500 to $10,000 one time, priced by site size and stack. Ongoing technical work starts at $1,500 monthly inside a broader SEO program, and site migrations are scoped per project. Every engagement begins with the free audit, which names the problems and prices the fix before you commit to anything.
Technical SEO Company vs Freelancer vs In-House
Three honest ways to get this work done. Which one fits depends on your stack, your site size, and your dev capacity, not on who is selling.
| Factor | Technical SEO Company (Egochi) | Freelancer | In-House |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly Cost | $1,500 - $7,500, scoped by site size | $500 - $3,000, often audit-only | $8,000 - $15,000+ salary share plus tools |
| Diagnosis Depth | Crawl, logs, Search Console, and field data read together | Crawl-tool reports in most cases | Deep on your stack, thinner on the search side |
| Shipping the Fixes | Through your dev team or ours, with the tickets written | Recommendations, rarely code | Your developers ship fastest; direct repo access |
| Log File Analysis | Server log parsing, real Googlebot behavior | Rarely offered | Possible with tooling and training time |
| JavaScript SEO | Rendering audits, SSR and pre-rendering plans | Rarely offered | Framework skill is there; the crawler-side view usually is not |
| Core Web Vitals Work | Code-level fixes, verified against field data | Plugin-level fixes in most cases | Strong, when dev time is protected for it |
| Migration Support | Full redirect mapping, launch monitoring, rollback plan | Limited repetitions | Usually their first one; we run them routinely |
| Cross-Site Benchmarks | Failure patterns seen across platforms and industries | Limited comparison data | Only your own site history |
| Continuity Risk | Team backup and documented findings | Single point of failure | Knowledge leaves with a resignation |
| Best For | Large or JavaScript-heavy sites, migrations, ongoing monitoring | Small sites needing a one-time audit | Teams with dev capacity who need diagnosis, not hands |
The Verdict
In-house developers are not the weak option here; they ship fixes faster than any outsider with repo access ever will. The gap is diagnosis: knowing which of two hundred flagged issues actually caps rankings and which are noise. Many of our technical engagements end with your developers doing the work from our prioritized, priced list. Hire a freelancer for a small site needing one honest audit. Hire a technical SEO agency when the site is large, JavaScript-heavy, mid-migration, or worth monitoring, because a wasted quarter there costs more than the fee.
Technical Problems That Block Rankings
Owners rarely see the cause. They see the symptom. Find yours on the left side of any card below, and the right side is what the audit usually finds behind it.
-
New pages take weeks to show up in Google
What you see: You publish, request indexing, and the page sits invisible while a competitor posting the same week already ranks.
What is usually wrong: Crawl budget waste. Googlebot spends its visits on parameter URLs, duplicates, and dead sections, so new URLs wait at the back of the queue.
-
Google indexes far fewer pages than you have
What you see: Search Console shows a fraction of your pages indexed, and the excluded count keeps growing.
What is usually wrong: Indexation barriers: canonical confusion, leftover noindex tags, or near-duplicates Google filtered out and never told you about in plain language.
-
Rankings fell off a cliff after a redesign
What you see: The new site looks better, and traffic dropped by half within weeks of launch.
What is usually wrong: Changed URLs without redirects, so years of accumulated authority now points at 404 pages. Often joined by heavier templates and a staging noindex tag that shipped.
-
A thinner competitor outranks your better page
What you see: Your page is deeper, better written, and sits below content half its quality.
What is usually wrong: Rendering. Your content loads through JavaScript the crawler renders late or not at all; theirs sits in the raw HTML where Google reads it instantly.
-
The site feels fast to you but fails Core Web Vitals
What you see: Every page snaps open on your machine, yet Search Console reports failing URLs.
What is usually wrong: Lab versus field. Your device, cache, and office connection beat your median visitor’s mid-range phone on cellular, and Google grades on their experience.
-
Two of your own pages trade places for one keyword
What you see: Rankings for a money term bounce between two URLs and never settle or climb.
What is usually wrong: Duplicate or overlapping pages splitting one query’s signals. Google cannot pick a canonical, so it alternates, and neither page compounds authority.
-
Traffic dips at odd intervals with no pattern
What you see: Google Analytics shows dents nobody can tie to a campaign, a season, or an update.
What is usually wrong: Server errors during crawl windows. 5xx responses that only surface under load get recorded in logs, and repeated ones teach Google to crawl you less.
-
Mobile rankings trail desktop rankings
What you see: The same queries rank noticeably worse on phones, where most of your buyers are.
What is usually wrong: Mobile-first indexing. Content, links, or structured data hidden on the mobile version simply do not exist as far as Google is concerned.
Is Technical SEO Right for You?
Who this is for
- You publish solid content that underperforms its quality: pages that should rank sit on page three, and nobody can tell you why.
- Your site runs a JavaScript-heavy stack: React, Vue, Angular, or a headless CMS, where what Google renders and what users see may not match.
- You run a large catalog: thousands of URLs, faceted navigation, filters, and pagination, where crawl budget and duplicates decide what gets indexed at all.
- Traffic dropped after a migration or redesign and has not come back.
When this may not be the right fit
- You have a ten-page brochure site and no content plan yet. There is little for technical work to unlock; build the content strategy first, then make sure nothing blocks it.
- Your problem is not plumbing. If the site is clean but the pages are thin, another audit will not move you; writing will, and we will say so in the audit rather than take the fee.
And if the gap shows on map results rather than organic pages, that is profile and review work, not infrastructure: our local SEO services cover that side.
Fair Questions Before You Hire a Technical SEO Company
My developer says the site is fine. Why would I pay for this?
Your developer is probably right by the standard they are using. A site can load fast on a dev machine, pass every browser test, and still fail for Googlebot: content rendered by JavaScript the crawler gives up on, staging directives left in robots.txt, redirect chains no browser user ever notices, field speed data that disagrees with the lab. Dev-tools green is not Googlebot’s view. The audit compares the two, and when they match, we say so and you keep the report.
Will fixing the technical side alone get me ranking?
No, and be suspicious of anyone who says otherwise. Technical work removes the ceiling; content and links do the climbing. A technically perfect site with thin pages ranks like a thin site. What the fixes actually buy is leverage: everything you already published, and everything you publish next, finally competes at full strength instead of half.
Do Core Web Vitals really matter for rankings?
Less than the industry sold them, more than the skeptics claim. Google confirms page experience is a ranking signal and a modest one: great content on a slow page still beats weak content on a fast one. The indirect effects of site speed are the bigger money: faster pages get crawled more, abandoned less, and convert better. Fix Core Web Vitals for revenue, and take the ranking help as a bonus.
Why did rankings drop after our redesign?
Because a redesign changes URLs, templates, and internal links at once, and any one of the three can cut rankings on its own. The usual finds, in order: changed URLs with no redirect map, heavier templates that fail Core Web Vitals, content trimmed for aesthetics, and a staging noindex tag that shipped to production. Most of it is recoverable, and the sooner the redirects and logs get reviewed, the more of it comes back.
Case Studies with a Technical Layer
Outcomes as published in our portfolio. Where the engagement was bigger than the technical work, the numbers cover the whole engagement, labeled honestly.
-
Corcoran Group
Real Estate | New York
A real estate brand whose templates carried heavy media and slow responses. The technical layer of the engagement brought loading and interaction inside Google’s published thresholds, and the rankings work climbed on that faster base.
- 3.4s → 2.1s LCP
- 340ms → 195ms INP
- +120% Organic Traffic
-
Menards
Home Improvement Retail
A retail catalog project judged on performance numbers: templates rebuilt for speed, a structure built to be crawled, and load time measured after launch rather than promised before it.
- 2.3s Load Time
- +245% Traffic
- +180% Conversions
-
Culbertson Law
Family Law Firm
A law firm engagement that followed the pattern every program here follows: foundation work first, content scale-up second. Sessions, calls, and traffic were tracked end to end, so each fix had a number attached.
- 7,200 → 18,400 Organic Sessions
- +91% Qualified Calls
- +156% Organic Traffic
-
Pitchfork Media
Music and Entertainment Media
A major music publication where page weight dragged on readers and rankings alike. Technical work cut load times while the content refresh ran, and organic traffic grew on the faster base.
- -60% Load Time
- +40% Organic Traffic
- 2.6M Monthly Visitors
-
The Pioneer Woman
Food and Lifestyle Media
A content platform operating at a scale where template decisions matter more than page edits. Technical and content improvements moved together, and the site now carries one of the largest audiences in its category.
- 30M+ Monthly Visitors
- +45% Time on Site
- +250% Lead Generation
-
Grown Brilliance
Luxury Jewelry Ecommerce
A jewelry catalog whose filter combinations were minting more URLs than products. Faceted navigation got tuned to stop the crawl waste and product schema expanded across variants, so Googlebot spent its visits on pages that sell.
- 160K+ Organic Visits
- 102,000 → 178,000 Organic Sessions
- $200M Annual Revenue
What Our Clients Say
-
Krispen Culbertson
Sr. Partner, Culbertson Law
"Blown away by the results"
Organic sessions grew from 7,200 to 18,400 in 6 months and qualified calls rose 91%. Egochi worked on the site itself as much as on the content, and the monthly report always said what changed and why. Source: GA4 and CallRail.
-
Justin Tyme
Owner, Reef Side Tattoo
"Couldn’t be happier"
Weekly bookings climbed from 18 to 56 in 4 months once Egochi rebuilt our portfolio pages and tuned everything behind them. Clients keep telling us they found us on Google. Source: GA4 and GBP insights.
-
Maria Antoinette
Founder, Antoinette Realtors
"Significant increase in leads"
Organic leads went from 4 to 24 monthly in 3 months, and organic traffic grew 70% after Egochi rebuilt our neighborhood pages one by one. Source: GA4 and GBP insights.
"The results are just amazing"
"Egochi is the best"
Meet Your Technical SEO Team
The engineers and analysts who keep your site fast, crawlable, and indexable.
-
Jobin John
Chief Executive Officer
-
Justin Brown
Head of Search Engine Optimization
-
Bryan Thomson
Head of Web Design & Development
-
Ina Komins
Head of Social Media Marketing
-
Kierra Pita
Head of Advertising & Content Marketing
-
Patricia Turner
Chief Creative Officer
-
William Carter
Chief Digital Strategy Officer
-
Andrew Miller
Senior SEO Strategist
-
Amy Robinson
Content Marketing Manager
-
Betty Harrison
PPC Campaign Specialist
-
Anthony Carter
Lead Digital Account Executive
-
Amanda Cooper
Social Media Director
-
Carol Parker
Senior Client Success Manager
-
Barbara Bennett
Email Marketing Lead
-
Charles Turner
Technical SEO Analyst
-
Brian Sullivan
Creative Director
-
Christine Walker
Director of Project Management
-
Christopher Brooks
Digital Marketing Strategist
-
Daniel Wright
Senior Analytics Specialist
-
David Henderson
Lead Content Strategist
-
Donna Mitchell
Client Communications Manager
-
Elizabeth Foster
Director of Paid Advertising
-
Supriya J. John
Brand Experience Specialist
-
Emma Scott
Social Media Content Creator
-
George Crawford
Technical Solutions Architect
-
Jacob Evans
Digital Content Coordinator
-
James Anderson
Marketing Automation Specialist
-
Jason Palmer
Junior Copywriter
-
Jeffrey Reynolds
Paid Media Analyst
-
Jennifer Lewis
Community Engagement Specialist
-
Jonathan Murphy
SEO Reporting Specialist
-
Joseph Morgan
Influencer Marketing Coordinator
-
Kenneth Stevens
Digital PR Manager
-
Kimberly Harper
Digital Marketing Intern
-
Kevin Morris
SEO Outreach Specialist
-
Lee Dawson
Junior Web Developer
-
Linda Peterson
Email Campaign Coordinator
-
Lisa Thompson
Social Media Ads Specialist
-
Margaret Bradley
Marketing Operations Lead
-
Mark Richards
Data & Insights Analyst
-
Mary Kennedy
Senior Copyeditor
-
Matthew Clark
Growth Marketing Manager
-
Michelle Sanders
Junior Marketing Designer
-
Michael Foster
Senior Conversion Rate Specialist
-
Nancy Wheeler
Digital Analytics Manager
-
Nicholas Pierce
Affiliate Marketing Specialist
-
Nicole Adams
Outreach Program Coordinator
-
Paul Franklin
Paid Social Campaign Manager
-
Richard Barnes
Reputation Management Specialist
-
Robert Murphy
Lead Solutions Architect
-
Ronald Davis
Marketing Technology Analyst
-
Ryan Bell
Paid Media Buyer
-
Sandra Gregory
Digital Account Coordinator
-
Scott Hopkins
CRM Implementation Specialist
-
Shirley Ellis
Customer Insights Manager
-
Stephanie Cross
Brand Content Designer
-
Steven Greene
Web Analytics Specialist
-
Susan Price
Affiliate Campaign Manager
-
Thomas Fisher
Lead Technical Architect
-
Timothy Nash
Mobile Marketing Strategist
Is technical SEO a one-time fix?
Partly. Foundational fixes stick: a cleaned redirect map, correct canonicals, and a sound architecture do not decay on their own. But sites drift. Every new page, plugin, template, or developer change can reintroduce problems, and large sites drift fastest. The honest model is a deep fix once, then monitoring that catches regressions while they are still cheap.
Technical SEO FAQs
What is the difference between technical SEO and on-page SEO?
On-page SEO works on what a page says: titles, headings, content, internal links. Technical SEO works on whether search engines can reach, render, and index that page at all: crawling, redirects, speed, structured data, and server behavior. On-page helps Google understand your content; technical work makes sure Google can get to it. Rankings need both.
How do I know if I have technical SEO problems?
Open Google Search Console. The Pages report shows how many URLs are indexed versus excluded, and why. The Core Web Vitals report shows real-user speed failures by page group. Crawl Stats shows how Googlebot spends its time. If indexed pages sit far below your actual page count, or excluded reasons keep growing, something structural is blocking you.
What is crawl budget and why does it matter?
Crawl budget is the amount of attention Googlebot gives your site in a given period. Small sites rarely exhaust it. Large sites do, constantly: when the bot spends its visits on parameter URLs, filters, and duplicates, the pages that earn revenue get crawled late or never. Cleaning that waste is often the fastest indexing win on big sites.
How do I fix Core Web Vitals?
Each metric has its own levers. LCP improves with smaller images, preloaded hero assets, and faster server response. INP improves by deferring JavaScript and breaking up long main-thread tasks. CLS improves by reserving space for images, ads, and fonts before they load. The order matters less than measuring with field data first, so you fix what real users feel.
What is index bloat and how is it fixed?
Index bloat is Google indexing pages that should not be there: parameter variations, thin tag archives, internal search results, near-duplicates. It spreads crawl attention and authority across junk instead of concentrating them on pages that sell. The fix is a deliberate mix of canonical tags, noindex directives, robots.txt rules, and pruning, applied per URL pattern rather than site-wide.
What is JavaScript SEO?
JavaScript SEO makes sure content produced by frameworks like React, Vue, and Angular is actually visible to search engines. Google can render JavaScript, but it costs the crawler extra time and resources, and anything that fails to render never ranks. We compare the raw HTML against the rendered DOM to find those gaps, then close them with server-side rendering or pre-rendering.
Do you handle site migrations?
Yes: domain moves, platform changes, HTTPS upgrades, and URL restructuring. The work is mostly prevention: a full redirect map before anything moves, staging checks, launch-day monitoring, and post-launch tracking until traffic stabilizes. Most migration disasters we get called into were missing exactly one of those steps, usually the redirect map.
How often should I run a technical SEO audit?
A full audit yearly for stable sites, quarterly for sites shipping features or content at pace, and immediately after any redesign, migration, or CMS change. Between audits, monitoring does the real work: Search Console alerts, crawl comparisons, and Core Web Vitals tracking catch regressions within days instead of letting them cost a quarter of traffic.
Does a small site need technical SEO?
It needs the fundamentals: clean indexing, working redirects, HTTPS, mobile parity, passing Core Web Vitals, and structured data. What it rarely needs is the heavy tooling: log file analysis and crawl budget work earn their cost on large or complex sites. A small site usually gets everything it needs from one thorough audit and a light maintenance check.
What platforms do you work with?
WordPress, Shopify, Wix, Magento, BigCommerce, Squarespace, custom builds, and headless stacks. Each platform fails in its own way: WordPress accumulates plugin weight, Shopify duplicates URLs through variants and collections, headless sites hide content behind JavaScript. Knowing each platform’s failure patterns is most of the diagnostic speed.
Free Technical SEO Audit
Get a free review of your crawl health, index coverage, Core Web Vitals, and rendering, with every ceiling named and priced. You keep the findings either way, whether or not you hire us.
Ready to Remove the Ceiling?
Technical SEO is one discipline inside our full search engine optimization services, so the fixes and the rankings work that builds on them can run as one program. Tell us about your site and we will send a plan with real numbers in it.
Questions? Call (888) 644-7795 or email care@egochi.com
Egochi Stats
- 500+ Clients Served
- 12+ Years Experience
- 922 Websites Designed
- $200M+ Revenue Generated
- 60+ Team Members
- 50+ Service Locations
- 95% Client Retention
- 1M+ Leads Generated