Technical SEO Services That Fix What's Quietly Killing Your Rankings

Technical SEO is the engineering layer that decides whether your content ever gets a chance to rank. Running Screaming Frog quarterly and emailing a PDF is not technical SEO — it is running a tool. Real technical SEO is an engineering discipline with measurable thresholds (LCP under 2.5s, INP under 200ms, CLS under 0.1 at the p75 mobile cohort), ticket-ready remediation, and a feedback loop tied to your release calendar.

Rule27 ships the full stack — 200+ point audits, Core Web Vitals and INP remediation, JavaScript rendering parity, schema rollouts, server log analysis, crawl-budget engineering, AI-crawler configuration (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended), and migration insurance — with named engineers, published prices, and a process that maps weeks to deliverables. Month-to-month after a thirty-day satisfaction window. Free technical teardown delivered in five business days, whether or not you hire us.

Rule27 is headquartered in Phoenix and ships technical SEO work in all fifty states. The team has on-the-ground experience in Phoenix, Tucson, Las Vegas, Denver, Austin, Nashville, Charlotte, and Tampa — the metros where we have eyes on the ground and existing relationships with local publications. For clients outside those metros, the engagement runs identically by video; the diagnostic does not change because the geography does.

Where geography matters is in the local-SEO layer — GBP optimization, citation cleanup, local PR — and that work pairs with the technical engagement but is not the technical engagement. We are clear on the distinction. Technical SEO is the engineering discipline; local SEO is the demand-side layer that sits on top of it. Most of our clients buy both; some buy only the technical work and keep their local agency in place. Either is valid.

Technical SEO is the engineering layer that decides whether your content ever gets a chance to rank. The agency you hired wrote the blog post. The developer you hired shipped the React component. Nobody checked whether Googlebot can render the page, whether your INP at the seventy-fifth-percentile mobile cohort breaches the threshold, whether your schema markup validates against the latest Schema.org diff, or whether your robots.txt is silently locking GPTBot out of half your site. Six months later, rankings are flat. The diagnosis is almost always the same: the content is fine; the substrate is broken.

This page is the long answer to what technical SEO services actually buy you in 2026. It is also the closest thing to a buyer's manual we have shipped for this category. If you are vetting agencies, read it as the field guide. If you are vetting Rule27 specifically, the pricing block, the methodology, and the FAQ close most discovery calls inside an hour.

What technical SEO actually is — and what it is not

The industry's working definition, pulled from the Google Search Central documentation and the Schema.org consortium notes, is the set of configurations on a website and its server that affect crawling, rendering, and indexing. That covers page elements, HTTP header responses, XML sitemaps, redirects, structured data, and the underlying performance characteristics of the front-end render. Every one of those has either a direct or an indirect impact on whether a search engine — conventional or generative — can read your site and decide where it belongs in the result set.

The definition is correct and almost entirely useless to a buyer. The reason it is useless is that technical SEO is a label most agencies sell without doing. Running Screaming Frog once a quarter and emailing you a PDF is not technical SEO. Telling you your site is "mobile-friendly" because it passes the deprecated Google Mobile-Friendly Test is not technical SEO. Real technical SEO is an engineering discipline with measurable thresholds, ticket-ready deliverables, and a feedback loop tied to your release calendar.

The three buckets most buyers conflate:

On-page SEO controls the writing and structure of the page — title tags, H1 hierarchy, internal linking, entity coverage, and the prose that answers the searcher's question. It overlaps with technical SEO at the metadata layer but is fundamentally an editorial discipline.

Off-page SEO is the work outside your domain — link earning, digital PR, brand mentions, citation profiles. It is the demand-side signal of authority.

Technical SEO is everything that controls whether a search engine can crawl your site, render it, understand the relationships between your pages, and trust the structured-data layer that describes the entities. It is the foundation — if it is broken, nothing else compounds.

If your content keeps falling off page two despite well-edited writing and a defensible link profile, the bottleneck is almost always technical. The diagnostic flow we run on every new engagement assumes that until the data says otherwise.

The cost of technical debt, in numbers we can actually source

The industry consensus on the cost of technical debt, pulled from the most-cited research and synthesized against our own client data:

For every additional second of mobile page-load delay, conversion rates drop by an average of twenty percent across the studied verticals. A ten-second mobile load slows bounce rate by one hundred twenty-three percent. The top organic result captures roughly ten times the click volume of position ten. Sites that breach the Core Web Vitals thresholds at the seventy-fifth-percentile cohort — LCP over 2.5 seconds, INP over 200 milliseconds, CLS over 0.1 — lose mobile rank share even when their content quality is strong. INP, which replaced FID as a Core Web Vital in March 2024, is now the most commonly failed metric in the 2026 cohort; most sites breach it on the first interaction with a third-party tag the team forgot they shipped.

The other lever buyers chronically miss is crawl-budget waste. On sites over ten thousand URLs, Googlebot allocates a finite hit budget per crawl session. Parameter URLs, faceted-navigation explosions, calendar widgets that index forward to year 3026, and redirect chains route a non-trivial share of that budget into pages that should never rank. The result: your highest-value pages get crawled less often, indexation lags releases, and your new content takes weeks to surface. We see crawl-waste ratios above sixty percent on the first audit for most ten-thousand-URL sites we inherit.

The AI-search layer adds a third cost. AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini citations all depend on schema markup that names the entity, content that answers the query in the first paragraph, and a robots.txt that does not lock the AI crawlers out. Most of the sites we audit are inadvertently blocking GPTBot, ClaudeBot, or PerplexityBot through a wildcard rule that predates the existence of those user agents. The site never appears in the citation set; nobody internally has connected the dots because the engineering team never knew the rule existed.

What technical SEO services we actually deliver

The stack is broader than the headline. We sequence it against your business and your release calendar, not against a checklist.

Full technical SEO audit — the 200+ point diagnostic

The artifact is a forty-to-sixty-page written audit covering crawl health, indexation, render parity, Core Web Vitals at the seventy-fifth-percentile mobile cohort, JavaScript SEO, schema markup coverage, internal-link architecture, HTTPS and header hygiene, server-log crawl-budget analysis, and AI-search readiness. Every finding gets a severity rating — P0, P1, or P2 — a revenue-impact estimate where the data supports one, and a ticket-ready remediation spec your engineers can paste into Jira without rewriting. We deliver this in four to six weeks. It is the same artifact we run for ongoing clients in the first month of the engagement.

Core Web Vitals and INP remediation

Measurement is field-data first — CrUX, real-user monitoring through SpeedCurve or DebugBear, and the GSC Core Web Vitals report at the seventy-fifth-percentile cohort. Lab tools (Lighthouse, PageSpeed Insights) come second; they are useful for diagnosing why a field metric fails, not for deciding whether it fails. Thresholds are non-negotiable: LCP under 2.5 seconds, INP under 200 milliseconds, CLS under 0.1, measured on mobile because mobile drives the majority of commercial-intent search traffic in every vertical we work in. Remediation patterns vary: LCP failures usually point at hero-image weight, render-blocking JavaScript, or font loading; INP failures almost always trace to third-party tags (analytics, A/B testing, chat widgets, ad scripts) that block the main thread on the first user interaction; CLS failures point at layout reservations missing from the image, ad, or embed elements. Each pattern gets a ticket.

JavaScript SEO and rendering parity

Next.js, React, Vue, Svelte, headless commerce stacks, and the long tail of single-page-application frameworks all create the same class of problem: the page Google renders is not the page your developer sees in Chrome. We audit rendering parity by comparing the raw HTML response against the JavaScript-rendered DOM in Googlebot's mobile user agent, identify content that loads only after a client-side fetch, identify links that exist only as button click handlers (and are therefore invisible to crawlers), audit hydration mismatches that cause layout shift and content flickering, and recommend the right rendering strategy — CSR, SSR, ISR, or static — against the page type. For most B2B SaaS clients we move marketing pages to SSR or ISR and leave authenticated app pages as CSR. The wrong choice here costs visible revenue.

Crawlability and indexation engineering

The foundation. We audit robots.txt for syntax errors, missing rules, and unintended blocks; verify the XML sitemap is under fifty megabytes uncompressed and under fifty thousand URLs per file with accurate lastmod values reflecting real content changes; audit the canonical-tag chain for self-referencing canonicals on indexable pages and cross-domain canonicals where they make sense; audit noindex usage for unintended blocks; resolve parameter handling for faceted navigation and tracking parameters; map and triage redirect chains. On large catalog sites this work alone unblocks tens of thousands of dollars of monthly revenue we have measured against the GSC index-coverage delta thirty days post-fix.

Schema markup and structured-data rollout

JSON-LD only. Schema types deployed against page type: Organization on the site root, LocalBusiness for service-area businesses, Service for service pages, FAQPage for content with question-answer pairs, HowTo for procedural content, Article and BreadcrumbList where appropriate, Product and Offer for ecommerce, Review and AggregateRating where the review data is genuine, VideoObject for embedded video, Person for author bylines, Event where applicable. Every implementation gets validated against Google's Rich Results Test and the Schema.org validator before it ships. The mistake every other agency makes is shipping schema once and forgetting it; Schema.org publishes diffs quarterly and Google's eligibility rules change with them. Ours is a maintained discipline, not a one-time deployment.

Site architecture and internal-link re-engineering

The depth-three rule — every page reachable from the home page in three clicks or fewer — is the floor, not the ceiling. Real architecture work includes breadcrumb deployment, contextual linking from high-authority pages to commercially important targets, hub-and-spoke topical cluster construction, orphan-page detection through log-file cross-reference, and pagination versus infinite-scroll trade-off audits. We have rebuilt the architecture on sites from two thousand to four hundred thousand URLs; the patterns scale but the implementation does not transfer cleanly.

Server log file analysis and crawl-budget optimization

The single most underused diagnostic in technical SEO. Most agencies skip it because the log files require server access most clients are reluctant to grant. We ingest thirty to ninety days of access logs, parse Googlebot, Bingbot, GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot hits separately, and produce a crawl-budget map: which pages get crawled most often, which never, what status codes the bots see (versus what your monitoring sees), and where the budget gets wasted. The deliverable is a redirect cleanup spec, a robots.txt update, and a parameter-handling rule set. On one e-commerce client this work alone restored eighteen thousand monthly organic sessions over the following ninety days.

Website migrations with rank-recovery insurance

Migrations — domain changes, platform replatforms (Shopify, BigCommerce, custom CMS), URL restructures, HTTPS rollouts, design system swaps — are the highest-risk event in the SEO calendar. We run them like a software deployment: pre-flight crawl, full URL inventory, mapped 301 plan reviewed against the inventory, staging-environment validation, deployment window scheduled outside peak, post-launch monitoring at the day-one, day-seven, and day-thirty checkpoints with a rollback plan if rank loss exceeds the negotiated threshold. We have shipped migrations for retail catalogs of seven hundred thousand SKUs and for SaaS marketing sites with twelve URLs; the playbook scales.

AI crawler and LLM optimization

The robots.txt rules that did not exist eighteen months ago. We audit and configure explicit allow/disallow rules for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, CCBot, Google-Extended, Applebot-Extended, and the long tail of secondary AI crawlers, against the legal and strategic posture your team chooses. We deploy llms.txt where the use case justifies it. We restructure content for AI-citation patterns — first-paragraph answer compression, semantic HTML, primary-source citation inline, and schema that names the entity. The result is measured against AI Overview presence, ChatGPT citation logs, and Perplexity citation tracking. Most clients see their first AI Overview citation in months four through six.

International and hreflang implementation

Multi-region brands need hreflang implemented correctly — a non-trivial task with seven well-documented failure modes that we see in roughly half of the international audits we run. We audit existing hreflang for return-tag completeness, validate locale codes against the actual content, verify the x-default fallback, decide on ccTLD versus subfolder versus subdomain against the brand strategy, and resolve geo-IP behavior that conflicts with hreflang signals. We have shipped this work across North America, EMEA, LATAM, and APAC.

Penalty and algorithmic recovery

Manual actions and algorithmic demotions both leave a fingerprint. We audit the Search Console manual-actions panel, cross-reference Google update timelines against your GSC and GA4 traffic deltas, classify the demotion (Helpful Content, link spam, core update, product-review update, page experience), and propose a recovery roadmap. Recovery is slower than the demotion was; we are honest about that on the first call. The work is technical, editorial, and link-profile all together.

Image, font, and asset optimization

The boring win. Modern image formats (AVIF, WebP) with proper fallbacks, responsive image sets with the right srcset breakpoints, lazy loading for below-the-fold imagery, font subsetting against the actual character set used on the page, font-display: swap to prevent invisible-text flashes, and CDN configuration that serves the right asset to the right device. On most sites this is a week of work that closes out a chunk of the LCP failures and reduces total transfer weight by thirty to sixty percent.

The 200+ item technical SEO audit checklist

The categories we audit on every engagement. The full PDF with all 200+ items is available as a download below; the headers below are the section anchors.

Crawlability and indexation

Robots.txt present at the document root, returning a 200 status with no syntax errors. Sitemap XML under fifty megabytes uncompressed and under fifty thousand URLs per file. Sitemap index pattern used correctly for sites over the URL limit. Lastmod values reflecting actual content changes, not deploy timestamps. Canonical-tag chain audit — self-referencing on indexable pages, cross-domain only where intentional. Noindex audit on pages that should rank. Parameter handling in GSC consistent with rel=canonical decisions. Pagination handled with rel=next/prev deprecation acknowledged. International URL signals consistent with hreflang.

Core Web Vitals 2026 thresholds

LCP under 2.5 seconds at the seventy-fifth-percentile mobile cohort. INP under 200 milliseconds at the same cohort. CLS under 0.1 same cohort. TTFB under 800 milliseconds. Render-blocking JavaScript identified and triaged. Render-blocking CSS audited for above-the-fold extraction. Third-party tag audit — every script tag accounted for with an owner and a justification. Font-loading strategy audited for swap behavior. Image lazy-loading audited — above-the-fold images explicitly eager-loaded.

JavaScript and rendering

Rendering strategy audited against page type — CSR, SSR, ISR, or static. Hydration mismatches identified through React or Next.js devtools. Lazy-loaded content above the fold flagged. JavaScript-rendered links (button onClick handlers) flagged as invisible to crawlers. Client-side fetched content that should be server-rendered identified. Single-page-application route changes verified to update title, meta description, and canonical tag correctly.

Architecture and internal links

Click depth from home page under three for commercial pages. Breadcrumbs implemented and visible to crawlers. Contextual linking from high-authority pages to commercial targets. Hub-and-spoke topical clusters identified and reinforced. Orphan pages identified through log-file cross-reference. Internal link velocity audited against new-page publishing.

Schema and structured data

Organization schema on site root. LocalBusiness for service-area businesses. Service schema on service pages. FAQPage where question-answer pairs exist. HowTo for procedural content. Article and BreadcrumbList on editorial content. Product, Offer, Review, AggregateRating on ecommerce. VideoObject on embedded video. Person on author bylines. Event where applicable. JSON-LD only — microdata and RDFa are deprecated. Every type validated against Rich Results Test and Schema.org validator before ship.

Mobile

Mobile-first indexing confirmed in GSC. Viewport meta tag present and correctly configured. Tap targets meet the forty-eight-pixel minimum. Responsive imagery with srcset breakpoints. AMP retirement audited — most clients should have retired by now.

HTTPS, security, and headers

TLS 1.3 enforced. HSTS header present with reasonable max-age. Content Security Policy audited for SEO impact. Mixed-content scan clean. Security.txt deployed where security disclosure matters. X-Robots-Tag headers verified.

Server logs and crawl budget

Googlebot hit ratio against total bot traffic profiled. Status code distribution audited — 200s, 301s, 302s, 404s, 5xxs. Wasted crawl on parameter URLs quantified. Wasted crawl on redirect chains quantified. Crawl-stat anomalies cross-referenced against deploys.

AI search readiness

Llms.txt deployed where the strategy justifies it. Content chunking audited for AI-citation patterns. Semantic HTML5 audited — article, section, aside, header, footer used semantically. Robots.txt rules explicit for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, CCBot, Google-Extended, Applebot-Extended. First-paragraph answer compression on commercial pages.

Our process — from audit to algorithm-proof

A seven-step engagement that maps each step to a calendar week and a deliverable. "Discover, analyze, execute" is a marketing diagram, not a contract.

Step 1 — Discovery and access (week 1)

We inherit Google Search Console, Google Analytics 4, Bing Webmaster Tools, your rank-tracker if you have one, your CDN dashboard if relevant, and — critically — server log access. Most agencies skip the server logs because the access requires conversations with engineering. We do not; the logs unlock the highest-leverage diagnostic in the process.

Step 2 — Crawl and log pull (week 1-2)

Full-site crawl with Screaming Frog, cross-validated against Sitebulb for large sites and JetOctopus for sites over a hundred thousand URLs. Thirty to ninety days of server logs ingested and parsed. Render-mode comparison against the JavaScript-rendered DOM in Googlebot's mobile user agent.

Step 3 — Findings deck with severity scoring (week 3-4)

The forty-to-sixty-page diagnostic. Every finding gets a severity rating, an evidence section, and a revenue-impact estimate where the data supports one. Recommendations are ticket-ready — your engineering team can paste them into Jira without rewriting.

Step 4 — Prioritized roadmap (week 4)

Findings grouped into a P0/P1/P2 roadmap mapped to your release calendar. P0 items ship in the first sprint; P1 items in the second; P2 items get scheduled or deferred against the business case. The roadmap is reviewed with your engineering lead, not just your marketing lead.

Step 5 — Implementation (week 4 onward)

For clients with engineering capacity, we hand off and pair on implementation. For clients without, Rule27 implements directly — we have shipped technical SEO work in WordPress, Webflow, Shopify, BigCommerce, Sanity, Contentful, Sitecore, custom Next.js, and custom Django stacks. The implementation pattern adjusts to the stack; the standard does not.

Step 6 — Validation crawl and GSC resubmission (week 6 onward)

Every shipped fix is validated with a re-crawl, a Rich Results Test pass on schema, and a GSC URL Inspection for the affected pages. Sitemap resubmitted where the affected URLs warrant it. Index-coverage delta tracked against the pre-fix baseline.

Step 7 — Monthly monitoring (continuous)

A live Looker Studio dashboard tracking Core Web Vitals at the seventy-fifth-percentile cohort, index-coverage deltas, crawl-stat anomalies, schema validation pass rate, and rank movement on the priority keyword set. Monthly forty-five-minute call walks through what changed, what we tested, and what is next.

Pricing — transparent, tiered, sourced against the market

The directory aggregates list other agencies' floors. The agency sales pages bury pricing behind a form. Ours is below.

Audit-Only — starting at $7,500 flat

Four-to-six-week engagement that produces the same forty-to-sixty-page diagnostic we run for ongoing clients, with severity scoring, revenue-impact estimates, ticket-ready remediation specs, a recorded debrief, and one follow-up question-and-answer session with your engineering team. No upsell. Best fit when you have in-house engineering and SEO capacity and just need the diagnostic.

Fix-and-Ship — starting at $15,000 (typical $15K-$35K)

Audit plus Rule27 implementation of all P0 and P1 fixes. Scoped from the diagnostic. Engagement runs eight to sixteen weeks depending on stack and severity. Includes validation crawl, GSC resubmission, and a thirty-day post-launch monitoring window with rollback if rank loss exceeds the negotiated threshold.

Ongoing Technical Retainer — starting at $3,500/mo

Quarterly audit refresh, monthly Core Web Vitals and crawl-stat monitoring, schema and technical QA on every new page your content team ships, ongoing log-file analysis, AI-crawler rule maintenance, and engineering office hours for in-flight feature work. Best fit for sites over five thousand URLs or for clients shipping new pages weekly.

Specialty SKUs

Site migration — starting at $10,000, typical $10K-$50K depending on URL count and platform. Penalty recovery — starting at $5,000 with the timeline dependent on the demotion type. JavaScript SEO audit (standalone) — $4,500 flat. Server log analysis (standalone) — $3,000 flat for thirty to ninety days of log ingestion plus the crawl-budget report. Schema markup rollout (standalone) — starting at $4,500 for sites under a hundred templates.

Market context for these prices

The SERP price intelligence on this query: one-time audits range from five hundred to five thousand dollars at the low end and up to thirty thousand for enterprise-scope diagnostics. Ongoing retainers run one to five thousand monthly for small business, five to ten thousand for mid-market, and ten to fifty thousand for enterprise. Hourly rates cluster between one hundred and one hundred forty-nine dollars at the agency average, with the full market spread between fifty and three hundred. Our tiers sit in the meat of the credible market, with the difference being that we publish them.

Every tier is month-to-month after a thirty-day satisfaction window. No 12-month contracts.

Who Rule27 builds technical SEO programs for

We are headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, and ship work in all fifty states. Our team has on-the-ground experience in Phoenix, Tucson, Las Vegas, Denver, Austin, Nashville, Charlotte, and Tampa. For clients outside those metros, the work runs identically and the relationship runs by video; we are explicit that geographic credibility compounds in markets where we live but does not gate national engagements.

The stacks we know cold: WordPress (including the WPEngine, Kinsta, and Pantheon hosting layers), Next.js, React, Vue and Nuxt, Svelte and SvelteKit, Astro, Webflow, Shopify (including Hydrogen), BigCommerce, custom Magento and Magento 2, Sanity, Contentful, Sitecore, Drupal, Hubspot CMS, and custom Django and Rails marketing builds. We will tell you on the first call if we have not shipped on your stack before; pretending to be a generalist when you have never optimized a headless e-commerce migration is how clients end up with content that gets their catalog deindexed.

The verticals we know cold: SaaS (seed to Series C), e-commerce on Shopify, BigCommerce, and custom stacks, home services (HVAC, plumbing, electrical, roofing, pest, pool), legal (PI, family, immigration, criminal defense), healthcare (dental, dermatology, orthopedics, mental health), professional B2B services, and multi-location franchises and brands.

Why Rule27 — the engineering-credible technical SEO partner

We speak dev

Our diagnostic is ticket-ready. Your engineering team does not have to rewrite our recommendations into anything they can paste into Jira. The audit reads like a code review, not a marketing deliverable. The deferred consequence: we tell you when a recommendation is not worth the engineering cost, instead of padding the report.

We do log-file analysis as a default deliverable, not a premium upsell

Most agencies skip server logs because the access requires conversations with engineering they would rather not have. We require them on the first call. The crawl-budget waste pattern we find on the first audit — the redirect chains, the parameter explosions, the calendar widgets indexing into the year 3026 — is the single highest-impact finding we ship across the client base.

We measure Core Web Vitals in the field, not the lab

Lighthouse and PageSpeed Insights are useful for diagnosing why a metric fails. They are not useful for deciding whether a metric fails. We use CrUX, RUM, and the GSC Core Web Vitals report at the seventy-fifth-percentile cohort. The agencies running a one-off Lighthouse score and declaring victory are measuring a single load on a single device. Field data is the only source of truth.

We do AI-crawler configuration as part of the default audit

The robots.txt rules for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, CCBot, Google-Extended, and Applebot-Extended did not exist eighteen months ago. Most sites are inadvertently blocking the AI crawlers through a wildcard rule that predates the user agents. We audit it on every engagement and configure against the strategic posture your team chooses.

We publish our pricing on the page

The pricing block above. No other agency in the top-ten SERP for technical SEO services publishes its full tier structure with deliverable line items. Onely hides it. Thrive hides it. Mainstreethost hides it. We do not.

We name the engineers doing the work

The lead technical strategist on every engagement is named in the kickoff document with a bio and a LinkedIn link. Not "your dedicated account manager." You know who is writing the audit, who is implementing the fixes, who is reviewing the schema markup, and who is parsing your server logs. The pattern of agencies hiding the doer behind a sales layer is one of the things this category has earned its reputation for.

We do not lock you into 12-month contracts

Month-to-month after the thirty-day satisfaction window. The agencies that demand annual contracts are admitting they cannot retain clients on the strength of the work. We retain ninety-four percent of year-two clients voluntarily.

Technical SEO services near you — national coverage, AZ-based roots

We are based in Phoenix, with deep on-the-ground experience in Las Vegas and Tucson. We deliver technical SEO services nationwide — remote-first, same Slack channel, same Loom recordings, same outcomes — with named team members assigned to your engagement from day one. If you are searching for technical SEO services near me and you sit in the Phoenix metro, Las Vegas valley, Tucson, San Diego, Los Angeles, Denver, Salt Lake City, or anywhere in the Mountain West and Southwest corridors, we have on-the-ground context and have shipped work in your region.

For clients in markets where we have not built a local footprint yet, the engagement runs identically by video. The diagnostic does not change because the geography does. Where geography matters is in the local-SEO layer — GBP optimization, citation cleanup, local PR — and that work pairs with the technical engagement but is not the technical engagement. We are clear on the distinction.

For the city-specific version of this engagement, see our Phoenix SEO, Tucson SEO, and Las Vegas SEO pages. For the broader services pillar, see search engine optimization services and the SEO pricing detail page.

Ready to stop losing rankings to things you cannot see

The fastest path to seeing if we are a fit is the free technical SEO teardown. Five business days, a real PDF, no auto-bot output. We will deliver even if you do not hire us. The pattern — we have seen it now across hundreds of engagements — is that clients who get the teardown either hire us or use the document to fix things themselves. Both are wins from where we sit.

No long-term contracts. No PDF-only audits. No hand-offs to junior staff. Named engineers, published prices, ticket-ready remediation, and a process that maps weeks to deliverables you can verify against your release calendar.