Kuroma Kuroma

kao.com scores 27/100 for AI Readiness

Kao (kao.com) is a 洗衣護理 site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 27/100 (grade F), audited 16 Sep 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (51) and its weakest is Authority Signals (10); the biggest single gap is Question Coverage & FAQ Presence at 0/100 (No FAQ schema markup detected). That places it below the median of the 31,080 sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://kao.com

27/100
Grade
F

The most points to recover are in External Citations & References: it scored 0/100 on a check worth 9% of the total, which takes 9 points off the overall score.

This audit is 44 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 44 days ago

Below the median of all audited sites Median 39 · Top quartile 45 · across 31,080 audited sites

Is kao.com ready for AI search?

Not yet: kao.com scores 27/100 (grade F). Start with Add FAQ Schema Markup and Make This Page’s Facts Extractable.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 37
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 51
Authority Signals 25% of the score 10
AI Readiness 30% of the score 18

Top fixes, ranked by points recovered

Ranked by each check's share of the overall score times how far it fell short, so the biggest number is the biggest win, not the lowest score.

  1. Add External Citations & References up to +9 pts

    On https://www.kao.com/ · Authority Signals → External Citations & References, scored 0/100

    • Few external citations to authoritative sources
    • Add links to reputable sources that support your claims
    • Use citation language like "according to..." or "research shows..."
    • Add a references or sources section
  2. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +7.5 pts

    On https://www.kao.com/ · AI Readiness → Citation-Worthiness, scored 0/100

    • Limited use of specific statistics
    • Conduct original research or surveys
    • Include specific statistics with sources
    • Add expert quotes and interviews
  3. Add Trust Signals up to +6.8 pts

    On https://www.kao.com/ · Authority Signals → Trust & Brand Signals, scored 25/100

    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible
    • Link to an about page that says who publishes this site
    • Declare the publisher in Organization schema (name, url, logo, sameAs) so an engine can attribute the page
    • Add clear contact options (form, email, phone)
  4. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +6.7 pts

    On https://www.kao.com/ · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 4/100

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
    • Add author byline with name and credentials
    • Create detailed author bio pages
    • Include "About Us" with company history
  5. Add FAQ Schema Markup up to +6.5 pts

    On https://www.kao.com/ · On-Page Content → Question Coverage & FAQ Presence, scored 0/100

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
    • Identify the top 5-10 questions your audience asks
    • Create a dedicated FAQ section on this page
    • Add FAQPage schema markup (see code below)

All 19 scored checks

Every check the published rubric scores, with what this audit found on the page.

On-Page Content 25% of the score

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Partial 67/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 113 words, 18 paragraphs, 20 lists, 5 images (5 with alt text)

    • Content length (113 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 0/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 0 question headings. 0 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 0/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    No JSON-LD structured data found

    • No extractable data structures in the page's own content — the 2 lists and tables this check found all sit in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar
  • AI Readability Score Partial 70/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 3 words/sentence. 0 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 78/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 3, H3: 1. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Needs work 34/100

    1.8% of the overall score

    Measures whether images, video, and charts have text equivalents AI can read.

    • 5 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("kao", "Kao Worldwide", "Kao Worldwide").
    • 3 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
    • This page has 5 images but only ~113 words, so your key information may be trapped in images that AI search can't read.

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Needs work 30/100

    1% of the overall score

    0 valid schemas, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Needs work 32/100

    2% of the overall score

    28 render-blocking resources. 504 elements for 113 words

    • 28 render-blocking scripts and stylesheets load before this page can appear
    • The page spends 504 HTML elements on 113 words of content, so crawlers parse far more markup than answer
  • Mobile Optimization Partial 60/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 52/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed. 5 placeholder links

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • 5 of 27 links cannot be followed by a crawler

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Fail 4/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 0/10. Expertise: 0/25. Authority: 0/25. Trust: 4/25

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Fail 0/100

    9% of the overall score

    0 external links, 0 citation phrases, 0 statistics. No references section.

    • Few external citations to authoritative sources
  • Trust & Brand Signals Needs work 25/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: Privacy Policy, Legal notice

    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Needs work 47/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    0 of 5 headings open a quotable passage, 0 definitions, 0 comparison structures

    • No passage an assistant could quote whole
    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Fail 0/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.

    • Limited use of specific statistics
  • Content Freshness Fail 0/100

    5.7% of the overall score

    No recent year references

    • No recent year references in content
    • No machine-readable date on the page, so AI cannot tell when it was written
  • Unique Value Proposition Fail 0/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    0 of 6 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

    • No passage on the page carries a figure a reader could check
  • AI Discoverability Not measured 44/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 44/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Partial 56/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    113 words readable without JavaScript

This audit measures citation readiness: how easily AI engines can crawl, extract, and quote these pages. It cannot see the off-site brand footprint (mentions, reviews, third-party coverage) that gates whether AI engines retrieve a brand at all; Kuroma's visibility scans and off-site signals track that side. How the score works

Score your own site → Claim this card

Other 洗衣護理 sites without a public score card

No public score card exists for these sites yet. Pick one to run a free audit on it; nothing runs until you confirm on the next page.