Paste your page content or HTML and get an instant score across all four E-E-A-T pillars, twenty signals in total, plus a prioritised list of exactly what is missing.
Enter your content and target keyword
Signal-by-signal breakdown
Priority fixes
What Is an E-E-A-T Score Checker?
An E-E-A-T score checker is a free tool that scores your page against Google's Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness framework. It scans for 20 detectable on-page signals across all four pillars and returns a score out of 100 with a prioritised list of specific fixes.
Google uses E-E-A-T as its core framework for judging whether content is good enough to rank well and be trusted by AI citation systems. Instead of treating it as one vague idea, this checker breaks it into 20 measurable signals you can act on immediately, so you see exactly which pillar is weakest and what to fix first.
The tool accepts plain text or full HTML source. Paste your page HTML and it also detects schema markup, author meta tags, and structural signals that plain text hides, giving a fuller picture of how Google and AI engines are likely to read your page. It also adjusts to your content type: YMYL pages, covering health, finance, law, or safety, are held to a considerably higher E-E-A-T bar, and the checker scores accordingly.
The FrameworkWhat Does E-E-A-T Stand For?
E-E-A-T stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness, Google's framework for evaluating the credibility of web content as described in its Search Quality Rater Guidelines. Google added the second E, for Experience, in December 2022. Here is what each pillar means in practice and the signals this checker looks for.
Experience
Experience asks whether the author has genuine first-hand involvement with the topic. It is the newest pillar and matters more in 2026 because AI can generate generic information at scale but cannot replicate lived experience. The checker looks for first-person language, personal examples, anecdotes, and original observations that signal direct involvement rather than secondhand research.
Expertise
Expertise looks at whether the content shows deep, accurate subject knowledge: precise technical language, thorough topic coverage, correct terminology, and depth beyond a surface summary. The checker assesses whether the content covers the topic completely and uses the vocabulary a genuine expert would use.
Authoritativeness
Authoritativeness measures whether the content signals that the author or site is a recognised, credible voice. The checker looks for author attribution with credentials, references to credible sources, citations of data, and structural signals like publication dates that show accountability.
Trustworthiness
Trustworthiness is the most fundamental pillar. Google describes it as the most important of the four, since a page can show experience and expertise and still be untrustworthy if it hides who is behind the content or makes unsupported claims. The checker looks for clear authorship, publication dates, external citations, and accuracy signals.
Verified 2026 data: A Wellows analysis of AI Overview citation signals found named, credentialed authorship makes a page roughly 35 percent more likely to be featured, and that around 96 percent of AI Overview citations come from sources with detectable E-E-A-T signals. Separately, Google's Danny Sullivan has repeatedly told publishers that strong SEO fundamentals already function as strong AEO and GEO, since the same quality signals apply across search formats.
Why E-E-A-T Matters More Than Ever in 2026
E-E-A-T has always mattered for SEO, but in 2026 it is the central battleground for visibility, for two reasons.
First, AI-generated content has flooded search results. When millions of pages can be produced fluently without genuine knowledge behind them, Google needs a reliable filter for content that actually reflects real expertise and experience. E-E-A-T is that filter.
Second, AI search engines including ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews lean on the same trust and quality signals when choosing what to cite. A page that scores poorly on E-E-A-T is unlikely to be cited in AI answers regardless of how well it ranks in traditional search, which makes E-E-A-T a requirement across two visibility channels at once.
- Generic, unattributed AI-written content is getting filtered out by both Google's quality systems and AI citation engines.
- Author credentials, original data, and first-person experience are now among the most differentiating signals a page can carry.
- YMYL content without strong E-E-A-T faces steeper ranking and citation penalties than non-YMYL topics.
- Pages that already rank well but carry weak E-E-A-T signals are increasingly vulnerable to being displaced by pages with stronger trust signals, even with fewer backlinks.
The 20 Signals This Checker Analyses
The tool checks 20 detectable on-page signals across four pillars, five per pillar. Here is what each category covers.
Experience signals (5 checks)
First-person language indicating direct involvement, concrete real-world examples, personal anecdotes or case references, specific named scenarios, and language patterns tied to hands-on knowledge rather than secondhand research. Pages that show real experience hold up better against updates that target thin or AI-generated content.
Expertise signals (5 checks)
Depth of coverage measured by word count and paragraph density, accurate technical or domain vocabulary, comprehensive answers with no obvious gaps, a logical structure reflecting expert understanding, and content depth beyond a quick summary. Expertise is the pillar most tied to ranking stability in competitive niches.
Authoritativeness signals (5 checks)
Author attribution with a name or credentials, external citations to credible sources, publication or update dates, data or statistics with attribution, and heading structures reflecting a well-researched approach. Authoritativeness is judged both on-page and off-page, but these on-page signals give Google's systems a baseline to assess credibility.
Trustworthiness signals (5 checks)
Transparent authorship, consistent factual signals, clear publication dates, absence of misleading patterns, and structural transparency markers. When HTML is detected, the checker also looks for Person schema, Article schema, author meta tags, and canonical tags, all of which feed the trustworthiness signals Google's systems read.
| Signal | Pillar | Impact | Easy to Add |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author name and credentials | Authoritativeness | Very High | Yes |
| Publication or update date | Trustworthiness | Very High | Yes |
| Statistics with cited sources | Authoritativeness | High | Moderate |
| First-person experience language | Experience | High | Yes |
| Concrete real-world examples | Experience | High | Yes |
| External links to credible sources | Authoritativeness | Medium | Yes |
| Technical or domain vocabulary | Expertise | Medium | Moderate |
| Word count 1000 or more | Expertise | Medium | Moderate |
| Person or Article schema markup | Trustworthiness | Medium | Yes |
| FAQ or How-To structure | Expertise | Medium | Yes |
How to Improve Your E-E-A-T Score: 9 Fixes That Work
Once you know which pillar is weakest, these are the highest-impact changes. Start at the top and work down.
Fix 1: Add a proper author byline
The single most important fix for Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness. Add the author's full name visibly, ideally near the top, and link it to a bio page listing credentials and other published work. Google's quality raters specifically look for this when judging who is responsible for the content.
Fix 2: Include first-person language and real examples
Phrases like "in my experience" or "when I tested this" signal lived involvement rather than generic research. You do not need every paragraph to be a personal anecdote. Two or three genuine first-person touches per page make a measurable difference to the Experience score.
Fix 3: Add a publication date and keep it updated
A visible published or last-updated date is a direct Trustworthiness and Authoritativeness signal. It tells Google the content is maintained and attributed as of a specific point in time. Undated pages are treated as potentially stale, which weakens trust signals significantly.
Fix 4: Cite specific statistics with sources
Generic claims like "SEO is important" score close to zero for Authoritativeness. Specific, attributed claims score far higher. Add two or three sourced statistics per page and link to the original study or report where possible.
Fix 5: Add external links to credible sources
Linking to authoritative sources, official documentation, peer-reviewed studies, or industry reports signals both Expertise and Trustworthiness by grounding your content in verifiable information rather than opinion. Aim for two to four external citations per page.
Fix 6: Demonstrate deep topic coverage
Thin content is one of the fastest ways to score poorly on Expertise. Cover the questions readers are most likely to have, the edge cases, and the common mistakes, not just the headline question. Our AEO Readiness Checker can help you spot specific structural gaps.
Fix 7: Add a FAQ section
A FAQ section demonstrates Expertise by showing you know the audience's real questions, adds Authoritativeness by acting as a comprehensive reference, and gives you a natural place to add FAQ schema. Add four to eight questions and answer each one directly.
Fix 8: Add Article or Person schema to your HTML
When you paste HTML into the checker, it detects whether Article, BlogPosting, or Person schema is present. If not, that is a quick fix. These schema types tell Google's systems who wrote the content, when, and what type of page it is. Use our free Schema Markup Generator to build the JSON-LD in a couple of minutes.
Fix 9: Use precise, domain-specific vocabulary
Generic language scores poorly for Expertise. Domain-specific terms signal that the author understands the field well enough to use its proper vocabulary. You do not need to write for academics, just use the precise terms your topic actually requires.
AI CitationE-E-A-T and AI Search: The Direct Connection
Many content creators still treat E-E-A-T as a Google-only concern. That framing is out of date in 2026. E-E-A-T signals now directly affect visibility in AI-generated answers across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Claude, because these systems are trained to prefer credible, verifiable sources and their citation criteria overlap heavily with E-E-A-T.
| E-E-A-T Pillar | Why AI Engines Care | Citation Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Experience | Original insight AI cannot replicate from training data alone | High |
| Expertise | Deep coverage lowers the risk of an incomplete citation | High |
| Authoritativeness | Named authors and sourced data make citations verifiable | Very High |
| Trustworthiness | Transparency lowers the risk AI associates with citing the source | Very High |
Pages that score 80 or above on this checker consistently show the signals both Google and AI citation engines treat as markers of high-quality, citable content, which makes improving your E-E-A-T score one of the most direct ways to improve visibility in AI Overviews and chatbot answers.
Reading Your ResultWhat Is a Good E-E-A-T Score?
The checker scores content 0 to 100 based on how many of the 20 signals your page passes.
Keep in mind on-page E-E-A-T is only half the picture. Off-page signals like backlinks, brand mentions, and author reputation across the web also shape how Google's systems ultimately evaluate a page. This tool checks everything detectable from the content itself.
YMYL ContentE-E-A-T for YMYL Content: Why the Standard Is Higher
YMYL stands for Your Money or Your Life. Google uses this category for content that could meaningfully affect a reader's health, finances, safety, or legal standing, including medical advice, financial guidance, legal information, and content that shapes major decisions.
For YMYL pages, Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines apply the highest E-E-A-T bar. A productivity blog post with a thin author bio is unlikely to be penalised heavily. A page giving dietary or investment advice without clear author credentials and sourced claims will be rated very poorly, regardless of keyword optimisation. If your content is YMYL, these signals become essential rather than optional:
- Named author with verifiable credentials in the relevant field
- Medical, financial, or legal review statement where applicable
- External citations from authoritative bodies such as government sites, medical journals, or regulators
- Clear publication and last-reviewed dates
- Transparency about the source's qualifications and potential conflicts of interest
This checker applies stricter scoring when you select YMYL as your content type, reflecting the higher standard Google applies to these pages.
Build a Complete Trust and Visibility Stack
WritoryBuzz covers E-E-A-T, AEO, and technical SEO in depth. Start with these guides:
Complete Your Trust and AI Search Workflow
Score your content against 15 AI citation signals to see if ChatGPT and AI Overviews will cite it.
Open Tool →Add Article and Person schema to close the biggest Trustworthiness gap this checker finds.
Open Tool →Tell ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity which pages to read and cite.
Open Tool →Preview how your title and meta description appear before you publish.
Open Tool →Generate SEO, Open Graph, and Twitter Card tags with live previews.
Open Tool →Control which AI crawlers, including GPTBot and ClaudeBot, can access your site.
Open Tool →