Kuroma Kuroma

iherb.com scores 66/100 for AI Readiness

iHerb (iherb.com) is a Technology site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 66/100 (grade A), audited 17 Jul 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (83) and its weakest is On-Page Content (52); the biggest single gap is Question Coverage & FAQ Presence at 18/100 (No FAQ schema markup detected).

Audited URL: https://iherb.com

66/100
Grade
A

This audit is 61 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 61 days ago

Is iherb.com ready for AI search?

Largely yes: iherb.com scores 66/100 (grade A). The remaining fixes are Add FAQ Schema Markup and Implement Comprehensive Schema Markup.

Category scores

This audit did not record which rubric version scored it, so it is not confirmed as the current 2026-08-13 rubric. Scores are only comparable within one rubric generation, so how much each check counts toward the total is left out. The checks on this page, their verdicts and their scores are exactly what that audit measured. A fresh audit of this site is scored on the current rubric.

On-Page Content 52
Technical Optimization 83
Authority Signals 74
AI Readiness 59

All 19 scored checks

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

On-Page Content

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Pass 98/100

    Found: 38744 words, 12 paragraphs, 55 lists, 311 images (262 with alt text)

    • 49 images missing alt text
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 18/100

    FAQ section found (no schema). 0 question headings. 0 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 20/100

    1 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: Organization

  • AI Readability Score Pass 93/100

    Average 2 words/sentence. 62 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Needs work 32/100

    H1: 0, H2: 1, H3: 12. Hierarchy issues.

    • Missing H1 heading
    • Insufficient H2 headings for content sections
  • Media Accessibility Partial 56/100

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

    • 42 of 304 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 84 images have generic or filename-only alt text (e.g. "image", "chart", a filename) that tells AI nothing about the content.
    • 304 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.

Technical Optimization

Authority Signals

  • E-E-A-T Signals Needs work 37/100

    Experience: 0/25. Expertise: 16/25. Authority: 10/25. Trust: 10/25

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Pass 85/100

    42 external links, 610 citation phrases, 1308 statistics. No references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Pass 93/100

    Present: SSL, Privacy Policy, Contact, Testimonials, Social Links

AI Readiness

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.