Score any article, blog post, or landing page against the four pillars Google uses to judge content quality. Paste a draft or enter a URL and get a plain English breakdown with the exact fixes that move the needle.
Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines rest on four ideas: experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness. Human raters use them to judge whether a page deserves visibility, and Google's ranking systems apply the same logic at scale. The pattern is consistent. Pages that demonstrate real knowledge and honest intent tend to hold their positions, while pages that merely repeat what others have said tend to fade.
Experience means the person behind the content has done the thing they are writing about. Expertise covers formal training and deep subject knowledge. Authoritativeness reflects how recognised the source is within its field. Trustworthiness comes down to accuracy, transparency, and honest communication. Each pillar reinforces the others, and a page that is missing one will struggle to earn the rest.
The stakes are highest for YMYL topics, the pages that touch a person's health, money, safety, or wellbeing. Google holds these to a higher standard because a wrong answer can cause real harm. That is why a finance blog with no named author, no credentials, and no sources will struggle no matter how well it reads. Search systems now read for proof of knowledge, not just keyword coverage.
That creates a practical problem. Most site owners cannot tell whether their content actually signals expertise, because the evidence is scattered across author pages, citations, original data, and clear sourcing. This tool scores the text you feed it against each pillar separately and points out the gaps that hold it back. A vague quality concern becomes a specific fix list.
Open the tool and pick your input. Paste content works well for drafts you are still editing. Check a URL pulls the readable text from a live page, which is useful before you publish or when you want to benchmark a competitor. The fetch takes seconds, and the analysis covers the same ground either way.
The AI grades all four pillars on a 0 to 100 scale and shows the evidence it found alongside the gaps it noticed. Read the gaps first. They are the reason most pages underperform. A missing author line, an unsourced statistic, or a claim with no supporting detail will surface here.
The recommendations section turns each gap into a concrete action. For health, finance, law, or safety pages, the YMYL risk indicator tells you whether your content needs a stronger trust profile before it can compete. After you make changes, run the audit again. The score should move, and that movement is your signal that the content is closer to what Google rewards.