Kuroma Kuroma

fukusei.co scores 40/100 for AI Readiness

FUKUSEI (fukusei.co) scores 40/100 (grade D) on AI Readiness, audited 14 Oct 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (71) and its weakest is AI Readiness (23); the biggest single gap is Structured Data Quality at 0/100 (No extractable data structures found — the page is unbroken prose). That places it above the median of the 31,080 sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://fukusei.co

40/100
Grade
D

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 16 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 16 days ago

Above the median of all audited sites Median 39 · Top quartile 45 · across 31,080 audited sites

Is fukusei.co ready for AI search?

Not yet: fukusei.co scores 40/100 (grade D). Start with Make This Page’s Facts Extractable and Add FAQ Schema Markup.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 49
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 71
Authority Signals 25% of the score 26
AI Readiness 30% of the score 23

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://fukusei.co · 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. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +7.5 pts

    On https://fukusei.co · 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. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +5.9 pts

    On https://fukusei.co · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 16/100

    • 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
  4. Update Content Freshness up to +5.7 pts

    On https://fukusei.co · 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
  5. Improve Unique Value Proposition up to +4.6 pts

    On https://fukusei.co · AI Readiness → Unique Value Proposition, scored 10/100

    • No passage on the page carries a figure a reader could check
    • Put a measured number in the sentences that describe what you do: a price, a percentage, a latency, a volume
    • Set a figure against something in the same sentence: a before and after, your price against the list price, your number against the alternative
    • Widen the evidence: prices, percentages, measured magnitudes and volumes each answer a different question about the same claim

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 Partial 51/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 420 words, 23 paragraphs, 3 images (2 with alt text)

    • Content length (420 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • Limited use of lists for scannable content
    • 1 images missing alt text (e.g. /assets/lab/hero-paper-lab.webp)
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Needs work 34/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 1 question headings. 2 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 0/100

    4.5% of the overall score

    1 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: Organization

    • No extractable data structures found — the page is unbroken prose
  • AI Readability Score Pass 84/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 10 words/sentence. 1 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 100/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 2, H3: 1. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Pass 77/100

    1.8% of the overall score

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

    • 1 of 3 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Pass 80/100

    1% of the overall score

    1 valid schemas, has Organization, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Pass 100/100

    2% of the overall score

    2 render-blocking resources. 215 elements for 420 words

  • Mobile Optimization Partial 50/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 72/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed. 3 placeholder links

    • Canonical URL does not match page URL
    • 3 of 34 links cannot be followed by a crawler

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Fail 16/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 0/10. Expertise: 7/25. Authority: 0/25. Trust: 7/25

    • 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 Partial 61/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Publisher schema (7 identity properties), Privacy Policy, Contact

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 54/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    3 of 4 headings open a quotable passage, 0 definitions, 0 comparison structures

    • 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 10/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    0 of 33 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 3 named versions or models.

    • No passage on the page carries a figure a reader could check
  • AI Discoverability Not measured 79/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 79/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Fail 10/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    This page could only be read with a full browser; AI crawlers use none

    • This page could only be read with a full browser; AI crawlers use none, so they receive far less of it than a visitor does.

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 →