Kuroma Kuroma

www.youtube.com scores 21/100 for AI Readiness

YouTube (www.youtube.com) is a Technology site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 21/100 (grade F), audited 30 Sep 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (60) and its weakest is AI Readiness (3); 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 3,298 Technology sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://www.youtube.com

21/100
Grade
F

The most points to recover are in External Citations & References: it scored 15/100 on a check worth 9% of the total, which takes 7.7 points off the overall score.

This audit is 7 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 7 days ago

Below the median in Technology Median 46 · Top quartile 53 · across 3,298 audited sites in Technology

Is www.youtube.com ready for AI search?

Not yet: www.youtube.com scores 21/100 (grade F). Start with Add FAQ Schema Markup and Make This Page’s Facts Extractable.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 10
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 60
Authority Signals 25% of the score 23
AI Readiness 30% of the score 3

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 +7.7 pts

    On https://www.youtube.com · Authority Signals → External Citations & References, scored 15/100

    • 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.youtube.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. Optimize for Featured Snippets & AI Answers up to +7.2 pts

    On https://www.youtube.com · AI Readiness → Answer Box Potential, scored 0/100

    • No passage an assistant could quote whole
    • No FAQ structure detected
    • Add a section heading followed by 25 to 200 words that answer it on their own, so an assistant can lift the answer without the rest of the page
    • Add clear definitions that directly answer "What is X?" questions
    • Add comparison tables, definition lists or step-by-step markup - structured comparisons frequently appear in AI responses
  4. Add FAQ Schema Markup up to +7 pts

    On https://www.youtube.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)
  5. Expand Content Depth & Comprehensiveness up to +6.8 pts

    On https://www.youtube.com · On-Page Content → Content Depth & Comprehensiveness, scored 2/100

    • Content length (11 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • Limited use of lists for scannable content
    • Expand content to at least 1,500 words (currently 11)
    • Add 2-3 subsections covering related aspects of your topic
    • Add bulleted or numbered lists for key points

The 18 checks scored on this page

Every check this audit scored, with what it found on the page. 1 more check was not scored on this page and is listed below with no score.

On-Page Content 25% of the score

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Fail 2/100

    7% of the overall score

    Found: 11 words

    • Content length (11 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • Limited use of lists for scannable content
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 0/100

    7% 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

    4.8% of the overall score

    No JSON-LD structured data found

    • No extractable data structures found — the page is unbroken prose
  • AI Readability Score Partial 70/100

    3.2% of the overall score

    Average 6 words/sentence. 0 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Fail 0/100

    3% of the overall score

    H1: 0, H2: 0, H3: 0. Hierarchy issues.

    • No headings a reader can see
  • Media Accessibility Not applicable

    Not scored on this page; its weight was spread across the other checks in this category

    Not scored on this page: no images, video or audio to make readable

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Needs work 30/100

    1% of the overall score

    0 valid schemas

  • Page Performance Indicators Needs work 33/100

    2% of the overall score

    14 render-blocking resources. 415 elements for 11 words

    • 14 render-blocking scripts and stylesheets load before this page can appear
    • The page spends 415 HTML elements on 11 words of content, so crawlers parse far more markup than answer
  • Mobile Optimization Partial 53/100

    4% of the overall score

    Missing viewport. has theme-color

    • Missing viewport meta tag
  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 68/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed. 2 placeholder links

    • 2 of 14 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 15/100

    9% of the overall score

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

    • Few external citations to authoritative sources
  • Trust & Brand Signals Needs work 45/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Privacy Policy, Contact, Social profiles (1)

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Fail 0/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    0 of 0 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 2 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 27/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 27/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Fail 14/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    11 words readable without JavaScript

    • Only 11 words are readable without JavaScript; AI crawlers run no JavaScript and will see very little of this page.

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 audited Technology sites

Other Technology 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.