E-E-A-T Audit

E-E-A-T is shown, not claimed. Google's raters and LLM citation systems both reward content that demonstrates first-hand Experience, subject-matter Expertise, Authoritativeness earned through external signals, and Trustworthiness through compliance and accuracy. Claiming "our team has decades of experience" in an "About" paragraph is the weakest possible signal. Showing it through documented case specifics, named expert contributions, and citations from authoritative sources is the strongest.

The 40-point rubric

Each of the four E-E-A-T dimensions is scored 0–10 against specific signals:

Experience (first-hand doing) — workflow details, failure stories, original photography, named-person anecdotes with concrete numbers. Cannot be AI-generated, must come from someone who actually did the thing. The most underscored dimension in our audits.

Expertise (subject-matter depth) — credentials on page, author pages with bios, topical clustering that demonstrates coverage depth, correct use of technical vocabulary, citations to primary sources.

Authoritativeness (external recognition) — backlinks from authoritative domains, AI-platform citations, Knowledge Graph entity presence, sameAs coverage across Wikidata, Crunchbase, LinkedIn. This dimension complements — doesn't duplicate — the Authority dimension of our AI Search Optimization Score framework.

Trustworthiness (accuracy and compliance) — accurate contact details, transparent pricing where relevant, visible policies, regulatory compliance for YMYL verticals. For regulated topics, we check signals against applicable frameworks (GDPR, HWG, UWG, BRAO, WpHG in DACH contexts). The Trustworthiness check is indicative and does not replace legal review; any final regulatory assessment should be commissioned separately.

Evidence extraction, not checkbox scoring

For each dimension, we extract specific signals from the page — which content demonstrates it, which is missing, which is present but too weak to count. The output is not a score; it's a score with the evidence for each point. That makes the remediation plan concrete: "increase Experience from 4 to 7 by adding [specific content types to specific pages]" rather than "improve E-E-A-T."

90-day re-audit

Every audit includes a 90-day re-audit at no extra cost. Same rubric, same methodology, fresh data collection. We flag which signals moved from Absent → Weak → Strong, record the composite-score delta, and highlight dimensions that haven't progressed. This is where remediation ROI is measured.

Where an audit flags Experience as Absent

Experience content is extracted, not written. If the audit scores Experience as Absent or Weak, the most effective remediation is an expert interview or an expert-library programme with your in-house subject-matter expert, producing transcripts that can be woven into pages as quoted authority. The audit recommendation names which topics and dimensions the interview should cover.