NPR Design Tools · Search Quality

Does Google trust your content?

A diagnostic E-E-A-T health check for any page. Google and Bing both judge content on the same qualities: Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness. Score all four, see the gaps costing you credibility, and get the exact fixes when you need them.

Free. No card. Diagnostic score, not an official Google or Bing score.
4Core E-E-A-T pillars
42+Deep checks
₹0Snapshot, no card
₹399Detailed scan per URL
What gets scored

Four pillars, scored on signals that are actually on the page

Neither Google nor Bing publishes a numeric trust score. This diagnostic is built from the signals Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines describe and Bing's Webmaster Guidelines echo under authority, clarity and trustworthiness, so every number traces back to something you can fix.

E

Experience

First-hand detail, original observation, specificity. Whether the page reads like someone who has actually done the thing wrote it.

E

Expertise

Author bylines, credentials, reviewer signals, topical depth and whether a real person stands behind the claims.

A

Authoritativeness

Citations, links to primary sources, organisation and Person schema, and the site-level context around the page.

T

Trustworthiness

HTTPS, canonical, freshness, image alt text, risky or guaranteed-claim language, and reachable About, Contact, Privacy, Terms and Editorial pages.

How it works
STEP 01

Enter a URL

One page and a work email. The tool fetches the page and reads its content, markup, authorship and outbound sources.

STEP 02

Get the snapshot free

Overall health score out of 100, all four pillar scores, YMYL sensitivity flag and the three biggest gaps. No card, no call.

STEP 03

Go deep at ₹399

42+ checks, the evidence behind every score, 15 to 25 prioritised fixes with why and how, and a client-ready printable report.

Pricing

Free to see the problem. ₹399 to fix it.

01 · Free Snapshot
₹0

See your score before you spend

  • Overall E-E-A-T health score out of 100
  • Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness scores
  • Your three biggest trust gaps
  • YMYL sensitivity flag
  • No card, no sales call
Run my free snapshot
Inside the detailed scan

42+ checks, grouped the way you would fix them

Content & experience

  • First-hand detail and originality
  • Topical depth versus thin coverage
  • Content freshness and last-updated signals
  • Specificity: names, numbers, dates
  • Duplicate or templated language

Author & reviewer

  • Visible byline and author entity
  • Credentials and job title
  • Reviewer or fact-checker signals
  • Author page reachable and substantive
  • Person schema present

Sources & authority

  • Citations to primary sources
  • Outbound link quality
  • Claim-to-evidence ratio
  • Organization and Article schema
  • FAQ and structured-data coverage

Trust & compliance

  • HTTPS and canonical integrity
  • Image alt text coverage
  • Risky or guaranteed-claim detection
  • About, Contact, Privacy, Terms, Editorial pages
  • YMYL-aware stricter thresholds

The same checks feed answer-engine and generative visibility across both indexes: Google AI Overviews and Gemini on one side, Bing and Microsoft Copilot on the other. Missing authors, absent citations and no policy pages are exactly what stops a page being quoted in either. See GEO vs AEO vs SEO for how the layers fit together.

Methodology

How the score is weighted

Trust carries the most weight, because it is the pillar with the most objectively checkable signals. Experience and Authoritativeness carry the least, because they depend on judgement and on data outside the page.

20%Experience
25%Expertise
20%Authoritativeness
35%Trustworthiness
85 to 100 · Strong
70 to 84 · Good
55 to 69 · Needs work
Below 55 · Weak

The weighting is ours, not a search engine's, and it holds for both Google and Bing because the underlying signals are the same. Two deliberate limits. Authoritativeness is capped at 76, because referring domains, brand mentions and third-party reputation cannot be read from a page's HTML, so the tool refuses to award a score it cannot evidence. And private, local or non-HTML URLs are blocked outright. Where off-page authority matters, we connect Search Console and a backlink source as part of an SEO engagement.

Unlock the full report

₹399 for the page-by-page fixes

Send the URL and we return the detailed scan: 42+ checks, evidence behind every pillar score, 15 to 25 prioritised fixes with why and how to fix, trust-page verification and a printable client-ready report. Paid securely through Razorpay, once, per URL.

Want the issues fixed rather than listed? That is an E-E-A-T, SEO and GEO engagement — tell us in the form and we'll scope it.

Detailed scan request

We reply with the secure Razorpay link and run the scan on confirmation. Diagnostic E-E-A-T scores are NPR Design guidance, not official Google scores.

FAQs

E-E-A-T audit questions

What is an E-E-A-T score?

E-E-A-T stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness, the qualities Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines use to judge content. Bing's Webmaster Guidelines ask for the same things in different words: clear authority, expertise and trustworthiness. Neither engine publishes a numeric score. This tool produces a diagnostic health score out of 100 across those four pillars from signals actually present on the page, so you can see why a page reads as credible, or why it does not.

Is the audit free?

The snapshot is free and needs a URL and a work email. It returns your overall score, the four pillar scores and your three biggest gaps. The detailed scan is ₹399 per URL and adds 42+ checks, evidence behind every score, 15 to 25 prioritised fixes, trust-page verification and a printable report.

Why ₹399, and is it a subscription?

₹399 per URL, paid once through Razorpay. No subscription, no minimum. One payment unlocks one detailed scan for the URL you entered. If you need a whole site scored, that is an ongoing SEO, GEO and AEO engagement rather than a single scan.

What is YMYL-aware scoring?

YMYL means Your Money or Your Life: health, finance, law and safety topics where weak content can cause real harm. When the tool detects a YMYL topic it applies stricter trust expectations, so a lending or medical page needs stronger author credentials, citations and policy pages to reach the same score as a general-interest page.

Will a better score improve my rankings?

E-E-A-T is not a direct ranking factor you optimise like a title tag. It describes the signals Google's systems and quality raters use to judge whether content deserves visibility. Fixing what the audit finds, missing authors, absent citations, no policy pages, thin first-hand detail, tends to improve performance in Google and Bing alike, plus the odds of being cited in AI Overviews and Copilot, because the same signals feed AEO and GEO.

Why is Authoritativeness capped at 76?

Because real authority partly lives off the page. Referring domains, branded search demand and independent mentions cannot be inferred from a page's HTML, so the tool will not award marks it has no evidence for. Connecting Search Console and a backlink data source lifts that ceiling, which is part of a full engagement rather than a single scan.

Who built this and can you fix the issues too?

NPR Design, a digital marketing agency in Andheri West, Mumbai, running since 2008 with 200+ brands grown, ₹50Cr+ media managed and an 8.4× average ROAS. The tool encodes the content-trust checklist we run on client sites. Yes, we can implement the fixes: see our SEO, GEO and AEO and AI content services, or the case studies.

Want NPR Design to fix these issues for you?

Get an E-E-A-T, SEO and GEO strategy review. We implement the fixes the audit finds, then report on Google and Bing rankings, AI citations and leads.

Get a strategy review Run a free scan first