Kuroma Kuroma

bii.dk scores 29/100 for AI Readiness

We are here for the changemakers. (bii.dk) scores 29/100 (grade F) on AI Readiness, audited 20 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (53) and its weakest is Authority Signals (3); the biggest single gap is External Citations & References at 0/100 (Few external citations to authoritative sources). That places it below the median of the 30,898 sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://bii.dk

29/100
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 26 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 26 days ago

Below the median of all audited sites Median 39 · Top quartile 45 · across 30,898 audited sites

Is bii.dk ready for AI search?

Not yet: bii.dk scores 29/100 (grade F). Start with Make This Page’s Facts Extractable and Add FAQ Schema Markup.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 43
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 53
Authority Signals 25% of the score 3
AI Readiness 30% of the score 22

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://bii.dk · 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. Add Trust Signals up to +9 pts

    On https://bii.dk · Authority Signals → Trust & Brand Signals, scored 0/100

    • No privacy policy link found
    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible
    • Add a privacy policy page and link to it in the footer
    • 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
  3. Improve Crawlability & AI Crawler Access up to +8.5 pts

    On https://bii.dk · Technical Optimization → Crawlability & Accessibility, scored 35/100

    • 1 of 5 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • The response at bii.dk is not a robots.txt file, so AI crawler access could not be verified.
    • This page opens 4 distinct paths into the rest of the site; linking to more of it gives crawlers more to find
    • Replace placeholder links (href="#", javascript:) with real URLs or remove them
    • Serve a plain-text robots.txt at bii.dk — the response we received could not be parsed as one
  4. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +7.5 pts

    On https://bii.dk · 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
  5. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +6.3 pts

    On https://bii.dk · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 10/100

    • 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

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 Needs work 39/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 243 words, 9 paragraphs, 1 lists, 1 images (1 with alt text)

    • Content length (243 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • Limited use of lists for scannable content
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Needs work 34/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 2 question headings. 0 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 9/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    No JSON-LD structured data found

  • AI Readability Score Partial 70/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 7 words/sentence. 0 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 92/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 1, H3: 4. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Partial 54/100

    1.8% of the overall score

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

    • 1 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Needs work 40/100

    1% of the overall score

    0 valid schemas, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Pass 100/100

    2% of the overall score

    2 render-blocking resources. 153 elements for 243 words

  • Mobile Optimization Pass 93/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 1 responsive images. has theme-color

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Needs work 35/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. AI crawler access unverified (robots.txt unreadable). 1 placeholder links

    • 1 of 5 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • The response at bii.dk is not a robots.txt file, so AI crawler access could not be verified.

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Fail 10/100

    7% of the overall score

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

    • 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 Fail 0/100

    9% of the overall score

    No trust signals found

    • No privacy policy link found
    • No about or company page linked from this page
    • No contact information easily accessible

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 58/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    2 of 6 headings open a quotable passage, 0 definitions, 0 comparison structures

  • 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 18 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 32/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 32/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 88/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    243 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