Kuroma Kuroma

orbit.health scores 42/100 for AI Readiness

orbit.health scores 42/100 (grade D) on AI Readiness, audited 20 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (50) and its weakest is On-Page Content (38); the biggest single gap is Question Coverage & FAQ Presence at 0/100 (No FAQ schema markup detected). That places it above the median of the 30,898 sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://orbit.health

42/100
Grade
D

The most points to recover are in Crawlability & Accessibility: it scored 36/100 on a check worth 13% of the total, which takes 8.3 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

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

Is orbit.health ready for AI search?

Not yet: orbit.health scores 42/100 (grade D). Start with Add FAQ Schema Markup and Make This Page’s Facts Extractable.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 38
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 50
Authority Signals 25% of the score 43
AI Readiness 30% of the score 39

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. Improve Crawlability & AI Crawler Access up to +8.3 pts

    On https://orbit.health · Technical Optimization → Crawlability & Accessibility, scored 36/100

    • 36 of 118 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • The response at orbit.health is not a robots.txt file, so AI crawler access could not be verified.
    • This page opens 19 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 orbit.health — the response we received could not be parsed as one
  2. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +6.8 pts

    On https://orbit.health · AI Readiness → Citation-Worthiness, scored 10/100

    • Limited use of specific statistics
    • Conduct original research or surveys
    • Include specific statistics with sources
    • Add expert quotes and interviews
  3. Add FAQ Schema Markup up to +6.5 pts

    On https://orbit.health · On-Page Content → Question Coverage & FAQ Presence, scored 0/100

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
    • Identify the top 5-10 questions your audience asks
    • Create a dedicated FAQ section on this page
    • Add FAQPage schema markup (see code below)
  4. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +5.4 pts

    On https://orbit.health · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 23/100

    • No author attribution found
    • Add author byline with name and credentials
    • Create detailed author bio pages
    • Include "About Us" with company history
  5. Add Trust Signals up to +5 pts

    On https://orbit.health · Authority Signals → Trust & Brand Signals, scored 44/100

    • No privacy policy link found
    • Add a privacy policy page and link to it in the footer
    • Declare the publisher in Organization schema (name, url, logo, sameAs) so an engine can attribute the page
    • Add customer testimonials or reviews

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 74/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 871 words, 17 paragraphs, 18 lists, 21 images (1 with alt text)

    • Content length (871 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • 20 images missing alt text
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 0/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 0 question headings. 0 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: WebPage, ImageObject, BreadcrumbList, WebSite

    • No extractable data structures in the page's own content — the 16 lists and tables this check found all sit in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar
  • AI Readability Score Partial 66/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 19 words/sentence. 0 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 86/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 7, H3: 3. Hierarchy issues.

    • Heading levels are skipped (H1 straight to H3)
  • Media Accessibility Fail 21/100

    1.8% of the overall score

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

    • 17 of 18 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 1 images have generic or filename-only alt text ("ZDF_logo.svg") that tells AI nothing about the content.
    • 8 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
    • This page has 18 images but only ~871 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 80/100

    1% of the overall score

    1 valid schemas, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Partial 51/100

    2% of the overall score

    64 render-blocking resources. 997 elements for 871 words

    • 64 render-blocking scripts and stylesheets load before this page can appear
  • Mobile Optimization Pass 85/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 14 responsive images

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Needs work 36/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. AI crawler access unverified (robots.txt unreadable). 36 placeholder links

    • 36 of 118 links cannot be followed by a crawler
    • The response at orbit.health 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 23/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 0/10. Expertise: 0/25. Authority: 8/25. Trust: 14/25

    • No author attribution found
  • External Citations & References Partial 58/100

    9% of the overall score

    7 external links, 0 citation phrases, 1 statistics. Has references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Needs work 44/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Legal notice, Contact, Social profiles (3)

    • No privacy policy link found

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 50/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    8 of 19 headings open a quotable passage, 0 definitions, 0 comparison structures

    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Fail 10/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.

    • Limited use of specific statistics
  • Content Freshness Needs work 49/100

    5.7% of the overall score

    References last year. Last modified: 12/3/2025

    • Content appears to be over 6 months old
  • Unique Value Proposition Fail 13/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    1 of 42 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 81/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 81/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    871 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