Seoquake Firefox

I use SEOquake mainly for speed. When I land on a competitor's page, one click shows me the title tag, meta description, H1, internal link count and external link count. Earlier this week I checked a rival's product category page: 34 internal links, 12 external, and they had an H1 but no H2s. That took two seconds. No login, no loading spinner.

The SERP overlay is its killer feature. While researching the keyword 'gravel bike frameset', I turned on SEOquake and saw that the top result had an indexed page count of 14,000 and a domain age of 8 years. The number two result had only 2,100 indexed pages and a domain age of 2 years. That told me which site was more established. It's not ranking data, but it helps me prioritise competitor analysis.

The keyword density report is old-school but still useful. I ran it on a client's page targeting 'carbon wheels' and found the phrase appeared 14 times in 500 words – a density of 2.8%. That flagged potential over-optimisation, so I rewrote the copy. I've also used it on competitor pages to see if they're stuffing keywords. For example, one competitor used 'disc brake wheels' 11 times in 400 words.

Link analysis gives a quick internal vs external breakdown. I exported a CSV of links from a blog post with 47 internal and 8 external links. The CSV export feature works for small batches. I once tried exporting 100 pages and Firefox froze.

Counter-argument: Some say SEOquake's page audit is comprehensive. It isn't. It checks basic on-page elements like meta tags and alt text, but it misses structured data, canonicals, and hreflang. Use it only as a starting point.

Decision rule: When I need a single-page diagnostic in under 5 seconds, I use SEOquake. For anything else, I use a proper tool.

SEOquake falls apart when you need depth. It cannot crawl a site. Last month I tried to use it to spot orphan pages on a 150-page site. After clicking through each page manually, I gave up. I loaded Screaming Frog and found 12 orphan pages in 4 minutes. Don't use SEOquake for technical audits.

The metrics it shows are diagnostic signals, not ranking factors. I used to believe domain age was a major ranking signal. I analysed 50 SERPs for 'SEO services' and found no correlation between domain age and position. The top result had a domain age of 3 years; the fifth result had 12 years. Treat domain age and indexed page count as context, not ranking factors.

Cross-browser inconsistency annoyed me. On Firefox, the 'Compare' feature often shows a blank panel. I tested it across Chrome and Firefox for the same two URLs. On Chrome it worked perfectly; on Firefox it didn't. If you rely on the compare feature, use Chrome.

Edge case: Checking redirects. SEOquake sometimes shows HTTP headers, but not reliably. I tried to verify a 301 redirect and SEOquake showed a 200 status. I had to use the browser's developer tools instead.

Counter-argument: You might think SEOquake's 'SEO Audit' tab gives a passing score, so the page is fine. But the audit is limited. It grades based on title length, meta description presence, alt text, and link count. It doesn't check page speed, content quality, or mobile usability. A page can score 90% and still rank poorly.

Decision rule: If the task requires more than a single page view, skip SEOquake. Use it only as a first-pass diagnostic when browsing.

When I outgrew SEOquake, I moved to dedicated tools. [Screaming Frog](/screaming-frog/) is my first choice for technical site audits. It crawls the entire site, finds broken links, checks redirect chains, and exports all data. I run it weekly on my clients' sites.

For backlink analysis and competitor research, I rely on [Ahrefs](/ahrefs/). Last week I analysed a competitor's backlink profile and found 43 referring domains, including two high-authority sites I wanted to target. SEOquake can't do that.

For SERP overlays, I now use [MozBar](/mozbar/) because it shows Domain Authority, which is a metric I actually use when evaluating link prospects. MozBar also highlights nofollow links and structured data. It's more useful than SEOquake's limited metrics.

If I need keyword data alongside SERP results, I install [Keywords Everywhere](/keywords-everywhere/). It shows search volume, cost per click, and trends directly on the SERP. SEOquake doesn't do that. I use it for content research regularly.

For a full competitor analysis suite, I occasionally open [Semrush](/semrush/) to view organic keywords and traffic estimates. It's heavy but powerful.

And if I'm on a budget, I've tried [Ubersuggest](/ubersuggest/) for keyword ideas and domain overviews. It's not as accurate as Ahrefs, but it's free and quick. For a broader list, see my [SEO tools](/seo-tools/) page.

Decision rule: I keep SEOquake installed only for the two-second link check. For everything else, I open one of these alternatives.