Kuroma Kuroma

taxact.com scores 66/100 for AI Readiness

File Taxes Online with TaxAct (taxact.com) is a Accounting / Tax site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 66/100 (grade A), audited 20 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is On-Page Content (75) and its weakest is Authority Signals (54); the biggest single gap is Structured Data Quality at 13/100 (No JSON-LD structured data found). That places it in the top quartile of the 107 FinTech sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://taxact.com

66/100
Grade
A

The most points to recover are in Trust & Brand Signals: it scored 53/100 on a check worth 9% of the total, which takes 4.2 points off the overall score.

This audit is 25 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 25 days ago

Top 25% in FinTech Median 51 · Top quartile 56 · across 107 audited sites in FinTech

Is taxact.com ready for AI search?

Largely yes: taxact.com scores 66/100 (grade A). The remaining fixes are Make This Page’s Facts Extractable and Update Content Freshness.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 75
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 75
Authority Signals 25% of the score 54
AI Readiness 30% of the score 62

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 Trust Signals up to +4.2 pts

    On https://taxact.com · Authority Signals → Trust & Brand Signals, scored 53/100

    • No contact information easily accessible
    • Declare the publisher in Organization schema (name, url, logo, sameAs) so an engine can attribute the page
    • Add clear contact options (form, email, phone)
    • Add customer testimonials or reviews
  2. Add External Citations & References up to +4.1 pts

    On https://taxact.com · Authority Signals → External Citations & References, scored 55/100

    • Use citation language like "according to..." or "research shows..."
    • Add a references or sources section
  3. Make This Page’s Facts Extractable up to +3.9 pts

    On https://taxact.com · On-Page Content → Structured Data Quality, scored 13/100

    • Turn any comparison or specification into a table with a header row — tables are the most extractable structure on a page
  4. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +3.8 pts

    On https://taxact.com · AI Readiness → Citation-Worthiness, scored 50/100

    • Conduct original research or surveys
    • Include specific statistics with sources
    • Add expert quotes and interviews
  5. Update Content Freshness up to +3.8 pts

    On https://taxact.com · AI Readiness → Content Freshness, scored 33/100

    • Content appears to be over 6 months old
    • Update statistics and data to 2026
    • Add article:modified_time meta tag
    • Include "Last updated: [date]" visibly on page

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 Pass 100/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 2750 words, 103 paragraphs, 11 lists, 53 images (52 with alt text)

    • 1 images missing alt text (e.g. //images.ctfassets.net/j9e1b5ly4280/44Lv2to267jSwaxwMnigFf/d1eabf815eed3f7a84530a93ced181b3/icon_arrow.svg)
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Pass 78/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    FAQ section found (no schema). 4 question headings. 3 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 13/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    No JSON-LD structured data found

  • AI Readability Score Pass 97/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 11 words/sentence. 13 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 98/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 13, H3: 24. Hierarchy issues.

    • Heading levels are skipped (H1 straight to H3)
  • Media Accessibility Partial 52/100

    1.8% of the overall score

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

    • 1 of 53 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 16 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("image of an hourglass", "XA Logo", "XFS Logo").
    • 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 Needs work 35/100

    2% of the overall score

    Fetch succeeded but was slow (6015ms). 48 render-blocking resources. 2022 elements for 2750 words

    • Server response was slow (6015ms; threshold 3000ms), which risks crawler fetch timeouts
    • 48 render-blocking scripts and stylesheets load before this page can appear
  • Mobile Optimization Pass 85/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 35 responsive images

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Pass 80/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed. 8 placeholder links

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • 8 of 134 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • Informational: robots.txt references legacy AI crawler token(s): anthropic-ai. Vendors no longer document these; migrate to the current tokens (for Anthropic: ClaudeBot, Claude-SearchBot, Claude-User).

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Partial 53/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 4/10. Expertise: 24/25. Authority: 4/25. Trust: 10/25. Has author

    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Partial 55/100

    9% of the overall score

    24 external links, 0 citation phrases, 44 statistics. No references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Partial 53/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Privacy Policy, Legal notice, Social profiles (6)

    • No contact information easily accessible

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 72/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    14 of 43 headings open a quotable passage, 2 definitions, 0 comparison structures

  • Citation-Worthiness Partial 50/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    0 original data indicators, 15 percentages, 0 quotes.

  • Content Freshness Needs work 33/100

    5.7% of the overall score

    References last year. Last modified: 10/25/2025

    • Content appears to be over 6 months old
  • Unique Value Proposition Pass 84/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    23 of 154 passages carry a figure, 5 set two figures against each other, 1 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 70/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 70/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    2750 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 audited Accounting / Tax sites

Other Accounting / Tax 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.