Kuroma Kuroma

egenome.ai scores 64/100 for AI Readiness

egenome.ai is a AI / Machine Learning site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 64/100 (grade A), audited 20 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (70) and its weakest is AI Readiness (59); the biggest single gap is Content Freshness at 0/100 (No recent year references in content). That places it in the top quartile of the 372 AI / Machine Learning sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://egenome.ai

64/100
Grade
A

The most points to recover are in Content Freshness: it scored 0/100 on a check worth 5.7% of the total, which takes 5.7 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 AI / Machine Learning Median 49.5 · Top quartile 56 · across 372 audited sites in AI / Machine Learning

Is egenome.ai ready for AI search?

Largely yes: egenome.ai scores 64/100 (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 65
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 70
Authority Signals 25% of the score 66
AI Readiness 30% of the score 59

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. Update Content Freshness up to +5.7 pts

    On https://egenome.ai · AI Readiness → Content Freshness, scored 0/100

    • No recent year references in content
    • No machine-readable date on the page, so AI cannot tell when it was written
    • Update statistics and data to 2026
    • Add article:modified_time meta tag
    • Include "Last updated: [date]" visibly on page
  2. Make This Page’s Facts Extractable up to +5.6 pts

    On https://egenome.ai · On-Page Content → Structured Data Quality, scored 16/100

    • Turn any comparison or specification into a table with a header row — tables are the most extractable structure on a page
  3. Improve Crawlability & AI Crawler Access up to +5.6 pts

    On https://egenome.ai · Technical Optimization → Crawlability & Accessibility, scored 57/100

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • 5 of 29 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • Verify canonical tag points to the correct URL
    • This page opens 7 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
  4. Add External Citations & References up to +4.1 pts

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

    • Use citation language like "according to..." or "research shows..."
    • Add a references or sources section
  5. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +2.7 pts

    On https://egenome.ai · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 61/100

    • No publication or update dates found
    • Add author byline with name and credentials
    • Create detailed author bio pages
    • Include "About Us" with company history

The 17 checks scored on this page

Every check this audit scored, with what it found on the page. 2 more checks were not scored on this page and are listed below with no score.

On-Page Content 25% of the score

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Pass 76/100

    9.7% of the overall score

    Found: 990 words, 62 paragraphs, 8 lists, 26 images (11 with alt text)

    • Content length (990 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • 15 images missing alt text (e.g. /_next/image/?url=%2Fimages%2Flanding-v3%2Fprofile_11.webp&w=96&q=75, /_next/image/?url=%2Fimages%2Flanding-v3%2Fprofile_22.webp&w=96&q=75, /_next/image/?url=%2Fimages%2Flanding-v3%2Fprofile_33.webp&w=96&q=…
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Not applicable

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

    FAQ schema present. 2 question headings. 2 questions detected in content

  • Structured Data Quality Fail 16/100

    6.7% of the overall score

    7 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: Organization, WebSite, MobileApplication, SiteNavigationElement, FAQPage, MedicalWebPage, ItemList

  • AI Readability Score Pass 85/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    Average 8 words/sentence. 4 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 95/100

    4.1% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 8, H3: 11. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Not applicable

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

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

    • 15 of 26 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 2 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("eGenome.ai", "eGenome.ai").
    • 16 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
    • This page has 26 images but only ~990 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 Pass 100/100

    1% of the overall score

    7 valid schemas, has Organization, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Pass 75/100

    2% of the overall score

    Fetch succeeded but was slow (3379ms). 2 render-blocking resources. 779 elements for 990 words

    • Server response was slow (3379ms; threshold 3000ms), which risks crawler fetch timeouts
  • Mobile Optimization Pass 100/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 23 responsive images. has theme-color

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 57/100

    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 29 links cannot be followed by a crawler

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Partial 61/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 4/10. Expertise: 24/25. Authority: 16/25. Trust: 4/25. Has author

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

    9% of the overall score

    11 external links, 0 citation phrases, 9 statistics. No references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Pass 82/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Publisher schema (8 identity properties), Privacy Policy, Contact, Social profiles (3)

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Pass 80/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    9 of 20 headings open a quotable passage, 2 definitions, 0 comparison structures, FAQ schema

  • Citation-Worthiness Partial 70/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    1 original data indicators, 7 percentages, 3 quotes.

  • 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 Partial 56/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    7 of 83 passages carry a figure, 1 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 73/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 73/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    990 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 AI / Machine Learning sites

Other AI / Machine Learning 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.