Canonical tags audit

A canonical tags audit is a one-time narrow check of how rel=canonical (pointers to the "main" version of a page for search engines) is set up on your site: whether canonical is present where needed and correct, whether pages reference themselves (self-canonical — when a page points its canonical at itself) where appropriate, whether there are conflicts (a canonical contradicting noindex; canonical versus hreflang; canonical chains and loops; canonical pointing to a redirect or a 404), how duplicates from parameters (UTM, sorting, filters) and pagination are handled, and whether there are cross-page and cross-domain errors. The goal is to put things in order so search engines consolidate duplicates correctly and index the right pages. Honestly about the main point: this is diagnosis, not setup and not a guarantee that the exact page you specified will get into the index. It is important to understand: rel=canonical is a recommendation to the search engine, not a hard command. Google and Yandex treat canonical as a strong signal but may choose a different page as canonical if they consider it more appropriate, and with serious site-trust problems may ignore canonical altogether. So "we guarantee this exact version will be indexed" cannot be promised. It is a snapshot in time. For completeness, access to the code/CMS or at least the ability to crawl the site is needed; without access — a check of what is served in public results. What you get: a report with canonical errors and conflicts by priority and recommendations (what to fix, where to add, where to remove); implementation is separate work, usually on the CMS or developer side. If the site is small and has no duplicates, we will honestly say a separate canonical audit is excessive — a basic check is enough. Picture this: instead of "canonical seems to be there" you learn that filter pages self-canonical to themselves (and so multiply duplicates), some canonicals point to old redirects, and pagination has canonical set to the first page. The base price starts from 6,000 ₽; it depends on the site size.

• You suspect duplicate pages but are not sure canonical is set up correctly.
• The wrong versions of pages (with parameters, sorting) get indexed.
• A site migration or redesign — you need to check canonical.
• The search engine ignores your canonicals and it is unclear why.

• Presence and correctness of rel=canonical on key page types
• Self-canonical where appropriate
• Conflicts: canonical versus noindex, versus hreflang, chains and loops
• Canonical pointing to redirects, 404 or unavailable URLs
• Handling of duplicates from parameters (UTM, sorting, filters)
• Canonical and pagination
• Cross-page and cross-domain canonical errors
• A prioritized report with errors and recommendations

• Clear understanding of where canonical is set up incorrectly
• A prioritized list of conflicts and errors
• Recommendations on how to consolidate duplicates correctly (implementation is separate)
• Understanding that canonical is a strong signal but not a guarantee

• We clarify page types and duplicate sources and collect access (code/CMS — where possible)
• We crawl the site and check canonical, conflicts, parameters and pagination
• We prepare a report with errors and recommendations and review it with you

• After the audit, will the exact page I specify get into the index?

  Not necessarily. rel=canonical is a strong signal but not a command: the search engine may choose a different canonical version. The audit removes errors and conflicts, increasing the chance of the right choice, but a specific URL in the index cannot be guaranteed.

• How is canonical different from a redirect and noindex?

  Canonical says "treat this version as the main one", but both pages remain available; a redirect sends the user and the robot to a different URL; noindex asks not to index the page at all. These are different tools, easy to confuse or put in conflict — that is exactly what we check.

• My site is small with no duplicates — do I need such an audit?

  Probably not. If there are no duplicates and few pages (for example, a one-page business-card site with no filters or parameters), a basic canonical check within a technical SEO audit is enough. A separate audit is more useful for catalogs and sites with parameters, filters and pagination.