Every number on this page was measured
Every value below comes from a measurement. Any row that cannot be measured is removed — no estimates, no rounding claims, no “coming soon”.
We do not yet have a published corporate case study. As proof we offer measurements rather than references. Each row states the tool, the device profile, the address and the date behind the value. You can repeat every measurement in your own browser; the last section explains how, step by step.
Which tools produced these values, and under what conditions?
Lab scores were measured with Google Lighthouse 13.4.1 on a mobile device profile, on an uncached first load. File sizes come from the build report, request counts from the browser network log, and structured data results from the Schema.org validator. Every URL was measured 5 times and the median is what the rows publish. Every row states its tool, profile, measured address and date.
| Tool | Version | What it measured | Profile and conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google Lighthouse | 13.4.1 | Performance, Accessibility, Best Practices, SEO, LCP, CLS | Mobile device emulation (412×823), CPU throttling, simulated slow network, uncached first load, 5 runs per URL (median) |
| Browser network log | — | Request count, transfer size, number of third-party domains | Chromium-based browser, cache disabled, first load |
| Schema.org validator and Rich Results Test | — | JSON-LD syntax and type errors | Against the published HTML, page by page |
| Contrast calculation and keyboard review | — | WCAG 2.1 AA contrast ratios, focus visibility, touch target size | Calculated from the design token values, then checked by hand with the keyboard |
Build report (npm run build) |
— | Gzip sizes of the HTML, CSS, JS and font files | Production output (dist/), gzip level 9 and brotli q11 |
Which rules does the method follow?
- The measured address is written on every row. Different pages produce different results; we do not claim that a single score represents the whole site.
- The published set of pages is not selected. Every indexable address in the sitemap is measured and every one is printed; the table starts with the lowest-scoring page. Publishing the good pages out of the ones you measured is cherry-picking, even when every row is individually correct.
- Lab measurement is taken on the mobile profile. The desktop score is almost always higher, which is why it is not published here.
- Values are not rounded up. The format the tool returns is preserved; a score of 97 is not presented as 100.
- A measurement that cannot be repeated is not published. If a value falls in the next round, the lower value is written and the row stays.
The Lighthouse Performance score depends on the speed of the machine that runs it: the same page can score higher on a faster machine and lower on a slower one. In this round the CPU benchmark index Lighthouse records on every run (benchmarkIndex) ranged from 1125 to 4210, with a median of 3083. LCP, CLS, transfer size and request counts are CPU-independent; when you measure, those rows should match, while the Performance score may move by a few points.
This is the same measurement and acceptance-criteria discipline we apply to client projects. The full working model is written out on the How We Work page.
What are the Lighthouse mobile scores?
Measured on the mobile profile, the four Lighthouse categories are: Performance 100, Accessibility 100, Best Practices 100, SEO 100. All four are the values the tool returned, not targets and not rounded up. The round was taken on 30 July 2026 with Lighthouse 13.4.1, with the production output served under the live compression and header policy; the address was measured 5 times and the rows publish the median.
- Lighthouse Performance (mobile) 100/100 verify
- Lighthouse Accessibility (mobile) 100/100 verify
- Lighthouse Best Practices (mobile) 100/100 verify
- Lighthouse SEO (mobile) 100/100 verify
Measured address: this site’s home page (/) · profile: mobile emulation · cache: disabled · 5 runs, median. The measurement was taken on the production output (dist/) served under the live compression and header policy. Each page is measured separately; these rows are the result for one address, not an average across the site.
The accessibility row measured 100 in this round. Automated auditing cannot cover every WCAG success criterion, so the manual checklist is published separately below. If the value drops in a later round, the lower value is written and the row is not removed.
So what does your LOWEST scoring page get?
The lowest Performance median is 95 and it belongs to /dijital-varlik-denetimi/; that page’s 5 individual runs were . We are not hiding that page: it sits in the first row of the table below. Every one of the 72 indexable addresses in the sitemap was measured in the same round; addresses were NOT selected by score. Performance distribution: lowest 95, median 100, highest 100. The site’s lowest values for Accessibility, Best Practices and SEO are 100, 100 and 100 respectively.
The shortest way to raise that row would be to shorten the page; we chose not to cut the content and we publish the lower value as measured. If it falls further in the next round, the lower value is written — the row is not removed.
On a proof page the most expensive mistake is not a wrong number, it is a BIASED SELECTION: publishing the good pages out of the ones you measured misleads the reader even when every individual number is correct. So there is no sample here: every indexable address in the sitemap is measured, every one is printed, and the table starts with the lowest-Performance page. The ordering is decided by the measurement, not by us.
| Score band | Pages | Share |
|---|---|---|
| 100 — full score | 68 | 94.4 % |
| 95–99 | 4 | 5.6 % |
| 90–94 | 0 | 0.0 % |
| below 90 | 0 | 0.0 % |
| Address | Perf. | Accessibility | Best Practices | SEO | Runs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
/dijital-varlik-denetimi/ |
95 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/contact/ |
96 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/iletisim/ |
96 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/digital-asset-audit/ |
98 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/aeo-nedir/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/core-web-vitals-rehberi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/geo-nedir/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/schema-org-rehberi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/bilgi-merkezi/sozluk/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/calisma-modelimiz/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cerez-politikasi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 4 |
/cozumler/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cozumler/bayilik-franchise-agi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cozumler/ihracatci-sanayi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cozumler/kurumsal-holding/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cozumler/magaza-zincirleri-perakende/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/cozumler/uretim-ve-fabrika/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/about/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/cookie-policy/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/corporate-web-design-kocaeli-turkey/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/faq/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/how-we-work/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/core-web-vitals-guide/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/glossary/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/schema-org-guide/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/what-is-aeo/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/knowledge/what-is-geo/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/privacy-and-kvkk/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/proof/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/answer-engine-optimization/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/brand-identity/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/core-web-vitals-performance/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/corporate-website/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/dealer-branch-network/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/digital-transformation-consulting/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/ecommerce/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/generative-engine-optimization/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/mobile-app-development/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/seo/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/services/structured-data-schema/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/corporate-holdings/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/export-industry/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/franchise-networks/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/manufacturing-factories/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/solutions/retail-chains/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/terms-of-use/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/en/why-baki-bilisim/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/gizlilik-ve-kvkk/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hakkimizda/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/aeo-answer-engine-optimization/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/bayi-sube-agi-dijital-yonetimi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/core-web-vitals-hiz-optimizasyonu/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/dijital-donusum-danismanligi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/e-ticaret/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/geo-generative-engine-optimization/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/kurumsal-kimlik-markalasma/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/kurumsal-web-sitesi/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/mobil-uygulama/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/seo/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/hizmetler/yapilandirilmis-veri-schema/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/kanit/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/kocaeli-kurumsal-web-tasarim/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/kullanim-kosullari/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/neden-baki-bilisim/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
/sss/ |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 5 |
There is no selection in this table: every indexable address in the sitemap was measured in the same round, on the same mobile profile, 5 runs per address, and all of them are printed. 68 of the 72 addresses returned 100 in all four categories; 4 addresses stayed below a full Performance score and those values are written as measured. 359 runs in total, plus 5 warm-up runs discarded before each round. The score depends on machine speed; the benchmark index range is written in § 01.
What are the Core Web Vitals values, in the lab and in the field?
In the lab measurement LCP came out at 1.4 seconds and CLS at 0.00. There is no field data (CrUX) yet: real user measurement is only published once enough traffic has accumulated. INP is not stated for the same reason — it is computed from real user interaction and has no lab equivalent.
Lab values
Field (CrUX) data
There is not yet enough traffic for field data. The Chrome User Experience Report only starts publishing data for an address once enough real Chrome visits have accumulated. Once that threshold is reached, field LCP, INP and CLS will be added to this section labelled separately from the lab values. Until then, no estimate is written here.
What thresholds has Google published?
The upper bound for an LCP considered “good”. The assessment is made at the 75th percentile of page views.
Source: Google web.dev — Core Web Vitals (opens in a new tab) · Accessed: 29.07.2026
| Metric | Good | Needs improvement | Poor | This site, lab |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCP | ≤ 2.5 s | 2.5–4.0 s | > 4.0 s | 1.4 s |
| INP | ≤ 200 ms | 200–500 ms | > 500 ms | field data required |
| CLS | ≤ 0.1 | 0.1–0.25 | > 0.25 | 0.00 |
The thresholds are taken from Google's public documentation. For the definition of each metric and how it is fixed, see the Core Web Vitals guide; for the scope of the work itself, see Core Web Vitals and performance optimisation.
Is the structured data on this page valid?
Each page publishes a single JSON-LD graph, checked against a target of zero validator errors. The graph on this page has 8 nodes: Organization, ProfessionalService, Person, WebSite, WebPage, BreadcrumbList, HowTo and FAQPage. Any field we cannot verify — coordinates, opening hours, price range — is left out of the graph.
- Nodes in this page's JSON-LD graph 8
-
ld+jsontags per page 1
Which schema types does the site use?
The shared graph is identical on every page: Organization, ProfessionalService, Person (the founder), WebSite, WebPage and, everywhere except the home page, BreadcrumbList. Page-type nodes are added on top: Service and HowTo on service pages, TechArticle and DefinedTerm in the knowledge centre, ItemList and CollectionPage on hub pages, and FAQPage on every page that carries questions and answers.
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@graph": [
{ "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/#organization" },
{ "@type": "ProfessionalService", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/#localbusiness" },
{ "@type": "Person", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/#erdibaki" },
{ "@type": "WebSite", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/#website" },
{ "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/en/proof/#webpage" },
{ "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/en/proof/#breadcrumb" },
{ "@type": "HowTo", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/en/proof/#howto" },
{ "@type": "FAQPage", "@id": "https://www.bakibilisim.com/en/proof/#faq" }
]
}
All @id values are consistently https and www; nodes are linked to each other by identity rather than copied. The method is explained in the Schema.org guide and its delivery scope on the structured data service page.
Against which criteria was accessibility checked?
The target is WCAG 2.1 AA. Colour contrast was calculated from the design token values and every text pair meets at least 4.5:1. Keyboard navigation, visible focus rings, 44×44 pixel touch targets and heading hierarchy were checked by hand. Automated result: Lighthouse Accessibility 100/100.
Measured contrast ratios
| Pair | Ratio | Criterion |
|---|---|---|
| Body text / background (light theme) | 16.2:1 | AAA |
| Secondary text / background | 7.0:1 | AAA |
| Tertiary text / background (14px minimum) | 5.3:1 | AA |
| Link and accent colour / background | 9.5:1 | AAA |
| Primary button: white text / red fill | 9.8:1 | AAA |
| Body text / background (dark theme) | 16.4:1 | AAA |
| Accent colour / background (dark theme) | 5.3:1 | AA |
| Form and interactive border / background | 4.0:1 | AA (non-text, threshold 3:1) |
What was checked by hand
- Every interaction can be completed with the keyboard; focus order follows DOM order and there is no keyboard trap.
- Every focusable element has a visible focus ring (
:focus-visible, 2px, 2px offset). - The first Tab press reveals the Skip to content link; the main content is marked with
<main id="main">. - Buttons, link list items and accordion headers have a touch target of at least 44×44 pixels.
- Each page has a single
h1, heading levels are not skipped, and the landmarks (header,nav,main,footer) are defined. - Icon-only buttons carry an
aria-labeland decorative SVGsaria-hidden; horizontally scrolling tables and code blocks are reachable by keyboard throughrole="region"andtabindex="0". - With
prefers-reduced-motionenabled all transitions are stopped; nothing autoplays, scrolls or counts on its own.
Automated tools cannot check every WCAG success criterion; criteria that depend on meaning, order and context can only be verified by hand. That is why we publish the automated score and the manual checklist together.
How many kilobytes and how many requests does this page cost?
The first load completes with 103.8 kilobytes of transfer across 8 file requests, of which 56.3 kilobytes are the two variable font files. Third-party requests: zero — no CDN, no icon font, no analytics, no web font service. Total JavaScript weight for the page is 4.0 kilobytes gzipped.
- First-load transfer weight of this page (compressed) 103.8KB
- File requests on first load 8
- Third-party requests on first load 0
- Total JavaScript weight 4.0KB gzip
| Resource | Transfer size | Note |
|---|---|---|
| HTML (this page, brotli) | 34.5 KB | Critical CSS and JSON-LD are inline; no separate request |
main.css (brotli) | 5.3 KB | Below-the-fold styles, loaded asynchronously |
site.js (brotli) | 4.6 KB | async, plain JavaScript; no framework |
archivo-var.woff2 | 28.8 KB | Variable font, subset down to the code points the pages actually render, preloaded |
jetbrainsmono-var.woff2 | 27.5 KB | The font of the measurement and metadata layer, preloaded |
site.webmanifest and favicon.svg | 3.2 KB | Three small requests the browser makes on its own |
| Third-party resources | 0 KB | No CDN, icon font, analytics or embedded map |
| Total (8 requests) | 103.8 KB | Uncached first load |
The table reports the transfer sizes Lighthouse recorded: the brotli q11 compressed body plus the HTTP response headers (CSP included, roughly 0.4 KB per response). The body-only total is 100.5 KB. Because each row is rounded from a byte measurement to one decimal, the column may not add up to the measured total exactly; the total row is the measured byte total, not the sum of the rounded rows. One caveat we owe you: this row is part of the page it measures, so writing the figure moves the result by a few dozen bytes. The font files are cached after the first visit, so subsequent page transitions download only the HTML.
Can AI crawlers reach this site?
Yes, deliberately. The robots.txt file names 20 AI crawlers one by one and grants each of them Allow: /. A 6.0 kilobyte llms.txt file is also published; it gives language models a summary of the company, a map of the pages and our citation policy.
- Explicitly allowed AI crawlers 20 open file
-
llms.txtfile size 6.0KB open file -
Addresses listed in
sitemap.xml72 open file
Which crawlers are allowed?
GPTBot, ChatGPT-User, OAI-SearchBot, ClaudeBot, Claude-Web, Claude-SearchBot, anthropic-ai, PerplexityBot, Perplexity-User, Google-Extended, Google-CloudVertexBot, CCBot, Applebot-Extended, Amazonbot, Bytespider, meta-externalagent, MistralAI-User, cohere-ai, YouBot and DuckAssistBot. 7 classic search engine crawlers (Googlebot, Googlebot-Image, Bingbot, DuckDuckBot, YandexBot, Applebot, Slurp) are named and allowed as well. The general rule (User-agent: *) also grants full access; no directory is blocked.
This is a written decision rather than a default: our objective is to be cited in answer engines and generative engines. The decision belongs to the client and is documented as a comment inside the robots.txt file; for an organisation that wants access closed, the same file can be written the other way round.
Why and how this policy is set up is explained in the What is GEO and What is AEO guides.
Where do these values sit within the sector?
In July 2026 the home page weight of 5 Turkish digital agencies was measured in a range of 180–530 kilobytes; this page is 103.8 kilobytes. The comparison is made without naming anyone, using measured values only. The purpose is not to expose competitors but to give a sense of magnitude.
Method: the same tool and the same mobile profile, home page address only, uncached first load, transfer size. The sample is 5 sites; no claim of statistical representativeness is made and it is not presented as a sector average. We do not publish names because those measurements were not taken with the other party's consent — our own measurement, by contrast, is published together with its address.
What did the previous version of this domain measure?
The WordPress version this site replaced was measured with the same Lighthouse build and the same mobile profile as the new one. Since it is our own history, nothing is anonymised in this row.
| Measurement | Previous version (WordPress) | New version (static) |
|---|---|---|
| Lighthouse Performance (mobile) | 52 | 100 |
| Lighthouse Accessibility | 65 | 100 |
| Lighthouse Best Practices | 74 | 100 |
| Lighthouse SEO | 92 | 100 |
| LCP (lab) | 10.2 s | 1.7 s |
| CLS (lab) | 0.116 | 0.00 |
| Total Blocking Time | 400 ms | 0 ms |
| Total transfer | 1,844 KB | 96.2 KB |
| Request count | 146 | 8 |
The previous version was measured on 29 July 2026 and the new version on 30 July 2026, with the same Lighthouse 13.4.1 build and the same mobile profile. The previous version was measured on the live address; the new version was measured on the production output (dist/) served under the same compression and header policy. Weight and request counts are directly comparable; because the two runs sat at different CPU benchmark indices (1314 and a median of 3924), the CPU-bound rows — TBT, TTI and the performance score — are not strictly equivalent: the direction and the order of magnitude hold, decimal equality does not. The previous version ran on WordPress and Elementor, and a robots meta tag kept it out of search engine indexes entirely.
How is the measurement history kept?
Every measurement round is appended to the table with its date stamp and no old row is deleted. Whether a score rises or falls, the record stays; that turns this page from a one-off claim into a maintained record. The table also shows the version measured and the tool version used.
| Date | Version | Perf. | Access. | Best Pr. | SEO | LCP | CLS | Weight | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Previous WordPress version | 52 | 65 | 74 | 92 | 10.2 s | 0.116 | 1,844 KB | Lighthouse 13.4.1 | |
| New static version | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 1.7 s | 0.00 | 96.2 KB | Lighthouse 13.4.1 |
The weight column is the first-load transfer size of the measured address. When the next round is published a new row is added to this table and the existing rows are left untouched.
How can you verify these scores yourself?
In four steps, without asking us anything: measure the Lighthouse scores with PageSpeed Insights, the structured data with the Schema.org validator, accessibility with WAVE or axe, and weight and third-party requests with your browser's network tab. All of it uses free tools and takes about fifteen minutes.
-
Measure the Lighthouse scores with PageSpeed Insights
Enter this site's address in the address field and read the mobile tab of the report. PageSpeed Insights runs the same Lighthouse engine on Google's servers, so the result is independent of your device and your network.
-
Validate the structured data
Paste the page address into the Schema.org validator: it lists syntax and type errors. Google's Rich Results Test reports the same graph separately, for rich result eligibility. The two tools look at different things, so both need to be run.
-
Scan for accessibility and navigate by keyboard
Scan the page with WAVE or axe DevTools. Then let go of the mouse and move through it with the Tab key only: the first press should reveal the Skip to content link, every focused element should show a visible ring, and at no point should you fall into a keyboard trap.
-
Count weight and third-party requests in the network log
Open the Network tab in developer tools, disable the cache and reload the page. Look at the domains in the request list: you should see no domain other than
bakibilisim.com. The total transfer size at the bottom can be compared with the § 06 table.
Your result may differ from what we publish: network, device, browser extensions and the moment of measurement all change the outcome. If you find a significant difference, write to bilgi@bakibilisim.com with a screenshot; we will look into it and update this page.
The free digital asset audit covers part of these steps on your own site: repeated Lighthouse measurements on a mobile profile, a scripted structured data rule check, an automated axe-core accessibility scan and the transfer size of the home page, with the findings reported item by item. It does not include the manual keyboard checks.
Frequently asked questions about the measurements
How were these scores measured?
Lab scores were measured with Google Lighthouse 13.4.1 on a mobile device profile, on an uncached first load, on 30 July 2026. File sizes come from the production build report and request counts from the browser network log. Every row states the tool, its version, the profile, the measured address and the date. A row that cannot be measured is not published; no estimates, no rounding, no “coming soon”.
Can I verify the scores myself?
Yes. Enter this site's address into PageSpeed Insights and read the mobile tab; the tool runs the same Lighthouse engine. For structured data use the Schema.org validator and Google's Rich Results Test, and for accessibility use WAVE or axe DevTools. If your result differs, network, device and the moment of measurement all matter, but please write to bilgi@bakibilisim.com anyway.
Does a Lighthouse score reflect real user experience?
Not exactly. Lighthouse is a lab measurement: one device, one fixed network, one load. Real user experience is measured in the field and assessed at the 75th percentile of page views in the Chrome User Experience Report. That is why we label lab and field separately; a page that looks good in the lab can still be weak in the field.
Why is there no field data?
Field data (CrUX) is only published once enough real Chrome visits have accumulated for an address. This site has just gone live, so that threshold has not been reached. Rather than writing an estimated field value we leave the row closed; when the data exists it will be added here with its measurement date and labelled separately from the lab value.
What happens if the scores drop?
We publish the lower number. In the measurement history table no old row is deleted; each round is appended. When a score drops we first write down the cause (new content, a new dependency, server response time), then fix it and update the row with a new measurement date. Our commitment is not to show high scores but to keep publishing the measurement.
Can you audit our site if we are outside Turkey?
Yes. The audit is remote and tool-based, so the location of your company does not change the method: repeated Lighthouse measurements on a mobile profile, a scripted structured data rule check and an automated WCAG 2.2 A/AA accessibility scan with axe-core are applied to your address. The manual keyboard checks published on this page are not part of the audit. The tool and date of every measurement are stated in the report. The written report is currently produced in Turkish; the 30-minute walkthrough call can be held online in English or Turkish.
The full proof architecture — measurement plus an open methodology, a transparent contract and an agency selection checklist — is on the Why Baki Bilisim page. Every other question is answered on the FAQ page.
See the measured state of your website within five working days.
The audit is free and creates no obligation to work with us. The report itemises findings on AEO answerability, AI crawler access, lab-measured Core Web Vitals, structured data validity and accessibility (automated scan). The tool and date of every measurement are stated in the report.
We work with corporate-scale, multi-location or multilingual organisations. One-off small jobs fall outside our scope; in that case we point you to smaller studios.