I expected it to tick over quietly for a while. Instead, within its first days it had already run more than 100 scans across nearly 80 different sites, and the results were far too interesting to keep to myself. So here is what we learned.
Drupal showed up in force
Of the roughly 80 sites that came through, nearly nine in ten were running Drupal. That tracks with who I built this for, but it was still lovely to see. Drupal 11 was the most common version by a wide margin, with Drupal 10 close behind.
The typical site landed in the mid-80s overall, which is a genuinely solid score.
Most Drupal sites get the fundamentals right, and the points they lose tend to come from the same few places: thin or missing meta descriptions, page titles that run too long, and a handful of technical details like canonical tags and sitemap configuration.
Content was the single most common place to drop points.
In other words, the platform mostly has your back. The gaps are usually in the content layer, which is exactly where a few minutes of attention pays off quickly.
A few stats that made me laugh
Now for the fun part. Every number below is real, straight from the scans. I
- Webhaven got scanned seven times (not by us). We got 100 out of 100 every single time. Nice!
- Someone scanned the most-visited website on the planet. It scored 53. The company that more or less invented search ranking has, by our checks, an unoptimized homepage. To be fair, it does not need to optimize its homepage for search. Still, it is the lowest score we have on record, and we will treasure it.
- Only two sites that were not ours scored a perfect 100. One was a webshop. The other was a government site. Whoever runs that page, you are doing the work.
- A spray foam insulation company outscored some of the most famous Drupal sites on the internet. It came in at 98, while a few household-name community sites sat in the low 80s. We are not saying anything. We are just leaving that here.
- One scan was not even a domain. Someone pasted in a raw IP address. It worked. It scored 71. We admire the commitment to skipping the formalities.
- The "so close" award goes to a site that nailed technical SEO with a 96, but is running end-of-life Drupal 9, so its Drupal-specific score was a brutal 3. Great SEO, on a foundation that stopped getting security fixes. Which brings us to the least funny finding.
End-of-life Drupal is quietly dragging sites down
The lowest overall scores in the whole set almost all shared one trait. They were running Drupal 7 or Drupal 9, both of which are end of life. Two sites were still on Drupal 7 in 2026.
Our tester treats end-of-life Drupal as a real problem, because it is one. No more security releases means the cleanest meta tags in the world are sitting on a foundation that is quietly accumulating risk. If your Drupal-specific score looks strangely low while everything else is green, this is almost always why.
If that is you, consider this a friendly nudge. Upgrading is exactly the kind of thing Webhaven exists to make painless.
Why these checks map to real fixes
The reason I built this tester, rather than yet another generic SEO scanner, is that most of what it checks maps directly to things a well-built Drupal site already handles: Metatag for titles, descriptions and Open Graph, clean canonical URLs, an XML sitemap, sensible path aliases, and structured data. When a check fails, it usually points at a setting, not a mystery.
Every remedy the tool suggests is something I can actually stand behind. I deliberately left out advice I could not verify, so if it tells you Webhaven can help with something, that is because it genuinely can.
Try it on your own site
The tester is live and free, and it takes about thirty seconds. Paste your URL, get your score, and see exactly what to fix. If you run the scan and want a hand closing the gaps, especially if you are staring at an end-of-life Drupal version, that is what we are here for.
And if you immediately go scan a certain famous search engine just to see that 53 for yourself, we completely understand.
