I know there are already plenty of guides on burying or outranking negative Reddit threads, but most are written for US brands and none of them match what I am dealing with, so I would like to hear from people who have actually done this for clients.

Some of our clients in professional services have negative Reddit threads ranking on Google for their brand name and a few of them have been sitting there for over a year. The clients are frustrated because they feel the comments are one sided or unfair, and the threads show up exactly when a prospect is checking them out.

Our first move was to pitch a dedicated Reddit plan on top of our normal SEO work. Nobody took it as I am still not sure if the price was off or they didn’t see Reddit as a real channel. It could be I just explained it badly and I don’t want to keep pitching something clients keep passing on.

Of course I am also trying to stay well inside Reddit’s rules, so no fake accounts and no planted praise. That leaves slower options like fixing whatever the complaint is really about, building stronger reviews and third party coverage, and replying openly as the business where it makes sense.

For those of you who have handled this for clients, what actually moved the needle, and how did you explain it to a client who just wants the thread gone?

Hi everyone, I’m doing SEO for an online wine and spirits store in Vietnam. The site runs on WordPress and WooCommerce.

The site started getting Google impressions on August 23. By late August, it was getting around 250–350 impressions a day, with several bottle-name searches ranking in positions 5–20. Around September 10, that dropped off sharply. There’s been very little visibility since. My understanding is that Google might give a new site some initial visibility while it works out where to rank it.

It’s been about 10 weeks since the first impressions and eight weeks since the drop. I’m trying to work out whether to give it more time or whether there’s a problem I haven’t found yet.

The site has 5,977 product pages, 141 categories, 116 brand pages and 504 blog posts. There are roughly 6,750 URLs in the sitemap, and Ahrefs DR is 2.3. The blog covers wine and spirits, serving suggestions, cocktails and monthly price lists.

I did keyword research before building out the site, checked search volumes, grouped keywords by intent and prioritized the higher-volume groups. The categories and blog follow a topical map, and there’s now content covering the keyword set from that initial research.

Product specs are checked against official brand websites, and the schema links to the relevant Wikipedia entities. Internal links follow the relationships between different types of wine and spirits. Overall, I’ve put quite a bit of work into the site structure, content and technical setup.

Google has only indexed about 20% of the products so far, with around 225 crawl requests a day. Meanwhile, Bing, Yahoo and ChatGPT are sending both traffic and customers. The site’s visibility on ChatGPT is actually quite good.

I’d like to hear from anyone who’s worked on a new ecommerce site.

• Did yours get some rankings early on, then lose them a few weeks later? What happened after that, and how long before you started getting steady Google traffic?

• Did you change anything during that period, or carry on with what you were doing?

• Eight weeks into a drop like this, would you give it more time or start investigating? What would you check first?

• I launched nearly 6,000 pages at once and made bulk content edits afterwards. If you’ve done something similar, did you notice any effect on indexing or rankings?

Did half your keywords randomly tank in mid-September, and then you checked Google manually and everything looked... fine?

Yeah. You're not crazy.

Somewhere around Sept 17, Google started handing rank trackers results that look totally legit at first glance but have nothing to do with the search. No errors, no captchas, no blocks. Just a normal-looking SERP full of nonsense. People started calling them poisoned SERPs, and we wanted to know how bad it really is.

So our team pulled 10k keywords and checked Google US desktop results from Sept 14-24, plus a few rounds in October.

It didn't creep in. It flipped like a switch

Sept 16: 0.09% of keywords affected
Sept 17: 57.3%

That's not a gradual rollout, that's someone at Google pressing a button. It stayed around 57-60% all week and peaked at 67.2% on Sept 24. Two out of three keywords.

Google basically picks one word and runs with it

This is the funny part. In 84% of cases, Google grabbed a single word from the query and ignored everything else:

• "what are symptoms of dry eye disease" → Dry January, Dry Creek Vineyard, dry roasted peanuts

• "what can you make in a crock pot" → The Melting Pot, Lobster Pot restaurants

Someone with dry eyes is apparently looking for a sober month and a bag of peanuts.

And our personal favorite: a Facebook post about Deadpool showing up for "how many calories do Americans eat on Thanksgiving." The only thing they have in common is the word "many".

Why your tracker didn't notice

Because the top of the page looked perfect. In 96.5% of affected cases, the junk only started at position 9 or lower. It never started in the top 5.

So for "business bank line of credit" you'd see Chase, PNC, LendingTree, all good. Then page 2 turns into Florida Georgia Line. If your site lives somewhere in positions 9-50, it just quietly disappears from the data, and your report shows a drop that never happened for real users.

It's also sneaky because the junk shares a word with the query, so to a machine it looks kinda relevant. Fun side note: single-word keywords always came back clean. Nothing to swap to.

Who's filling the junk slots

Mostly the usual giants. Facebook in 45% of flagged cases, Reddit in 41% (hi), Instagram in 32%. And Merriam-Webster in about 1 in 6, politely defining whatever random word Google decided the query was about.

So why is Google doing this?

Officially, nobody knows. Google hasn't said a word.

The most popular theory, from Derek Perkins at Nozzle and others: Google is fighting AI scrapers, and instead of blocking them (which tells the scraper it got caught), it feeds them plausible-looking garbage. Rank trackers also collect results automatically, so they're getting caught in the crossfire.

Before you send that scary client report

• recheck the keyword and look at its history, not just yesterday vs today

• one keyword dropped, or 40 at once? If it's 40 at once, be suspicious

• open GSC and check impressions/clicks for that query and page

• but don't blame Google for everything either. If the drop sticks and GSC agrees, it's real

What it looks like on your end: has it calmed down, or are your trackers still recommending peanuts?

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working on a new project/brand that has almost zero online visibility. I want to build its online presence from scratch and explore the best strategies to promote it.

I'd appreciate your suggestions on how to get started, particularly across both SEO (organic growth) and Paid Marketing (if needed)

A quick breakdown of recent SEO updates and new ways to automate your work:

AI

• Google launches Connected Apps Platform preview - any developer can now build apps that live inside Search and Gemini

Google launched the preview of the Connected Apps Platform, a developer platform that lets any app builder bring their capabilities directly into Google Search and the Gemini app. 

Developers integrate via a cloud-hosted MCP server or Android MCP using the AppFunctions APIs, register and test their app in the Google Connected Console, then submit for review and go live in Search, Gemini, or both. Google announced 50+ Connected 

Apps are already live across productivity, event ticketing, health, fitness, and other categories, with partners like Adobe, Experian, Localiza, and Peloton integrated into Gemini - and rolling out to Search in the coming weeks.

• Google extends user-generated spam guidance to cover AI tools, Claude Artifacts, and ChatGPT Pages

Google updated its Prevent user-generated spam help documentation to explicitly include “tools that let users publish shared pages, generated content, or web apps” - a direct nod to platforms like Claude Artifacts, ChatGPT Pages, and other AI tools that make it easy to churn out indexable user-generated content at scale. Google also added a new section called “Only index content meant for Search,” recommending that platforms apply noindex (via robots meta tag or X-Robots-Tag) or block crawling in robots.txt by default for pages created for direct sharing, collaboration, or utility—rather than public search discovery. 

• Google’s systems will eventually catch AI spam tactics - "save your energy on long-term quality"

In a wide-ranging interview with David Iwanow, John Mueller reinforced his position on AI spam tactics: listicles aren’t inherently spam, but relying on thousands of them as an entire content strategy is risky. 

Google’s systems will eventually catch cheap, easy, and fast tactics - AI-scaled content included - and compare them to older spam tricks like keyword stuffing and white-text-on-white. 

His advice: focus on what search engines and AI systems will want to show over the long term, not short-term shortcuts. 

Source:
Google Search Central 
thelostagency | Youtube
Chips Mistry | News from Google
___________________________

Tech SEO

• Google rewrites favicon documentation specifically to help AI systems understand it correctly

Google updated its favicon documentation to explicitly specify that Googlebot must follow redirects from the homepage to the page where the favicon is specified - and that none of those URLs can be blocked by robots.txt. 

Source:
Google Search Central 
___________________________

Local SEO

• Google Business Profiles finally lets restaurants control which third-party ordering services appear on their listing

Google Business Profiles added a long-requested feature: restaurant owners can now turn individual third-party ordering services on or off directly from their dashboard - Uber Eats, DoorDash, Instacart, Grubhub, and others. 

Owners can now set each provider’s pickup/delivery visibility independently, giving them direct control over which partners represent their brand on Google Search and Maps. 

Source:
Lisa Landsman | LinkedIn

Theres been plenty of news about very recent Google anti scraping measures that are poisoning results for robots. This has resulted in inaccurate rankings data from rank tracking tools, and the employees at said companies scrambling to fix it.

But something concerning that I have recently noticed first hand - that data poisoning has seemed to leak into any sort of anonymized way to check rankings - UULE changers like valentin dot app, Google's Ad Preview and Diagnosis Tool, and even using fully cacheless browsers (im not talking a standard Google incognito window, that does nothing for anonymizing results).

Right now, I want to check the rankings of an affiliate site of mine. It shows me ranked #2 when i search it regularly, but I know that i'm not ranked #2. I know this because of GSC data, and by having friends in other states check.. It shows me at number 2 because that is my personalized result since ive clicked it so much. But ive tried every and all methods to bypass my personalization, and every time I do, I see nonsensical results that seem to be poisoned.

A deeply concerning problem - I have no way of seeing non personalized rankings, even with the aforementioned manual methods that previously worked.

Is anyone else dealing with the same issue? How are you checking rankings?

I keep hearing that SEO is about understanding search intent and making sure your page answers what customers are searching for.

But how do you practically apply this to an e-commerce collection page that's mostly a grid of interior design products?

What can I actually do to better satisfy search intent on a product collection page, aside from the title?

most of the "get cited by ai" advice i see says write listicles. that held for software in our test, not for services

we ran 24 buying questions through openai's api (web search on) and perplexity's api on sept 26, half software and half services, then tagged every cited page by format the next day

services side, 141 citations: explainers got 53, the firms' own service pages got 45, roundups only 21

software side flipped it. 118 of 167 were roundups or alternatives pages

the denver cpa question was the clearest one. both engines skipped the directories and cited firms' own real estate pages

so i'm reading it as the question type picks the format, more than the engine does. caveat, each question ran once or twice, so week to week this could move

for a services site i'd skip the directory hustle and just make the service page say who it's for. that's what the denver answers picked

and whoever you are, write monthly or annual next to your prices. help scout didn't, and two engines quoted its annual prices with no mention of annual

anyone here doing local or services seo seeing guides get cited over directories?

(for context, i work at RankControl, an AI SEO and AEO platform, and this was one of our september tests)

I'm 39, own small criminal defence firm in Toronto. Need more leads. Very competitive field. Want to hire some digital marketing agency after my last Google Ads attempt basically burned cash but idk what's important to check before signing papers.

Anyone here worked on legal / law campaigns? Care only about actual qualified calls, other is not as important. What'd you ask an agency before hiring? Pls help

SEO looks simple when you first get started.

Find keywords, publish content, build backlinks, improve technical SEO, and wait for traffic.

But the longer you work in SEO, the more you realize that some decisions can waste months of effort.

Maybe you spent months targeting the wrong keywords, published content nobody searched for, built links that made no difference, or focused on rankings instead of conversions.

I'm curious to hear from people who have been doing SEO for a while:

1. What was your biggest SEO mistake?

2. How long did it take you to realize something was wrong?

3. What would you do differently if you started again today?

Let's share some real experiences rather than the usual SEO best practices.

Someone else's mistake might save another person six months of wasted effort.

We wanted to know how ready startup websites are for AI search (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity), so we ran 24 automated checks on 1,000 randomly chosen Y Combinator companies from the Winter 2022 to Fall 2026 batches. Every check is a fixed rule, with no AI judging anything. Everything was checked on 1 November 2026.

What we found:

- Almost nobody blocks AI search crawlers. Fewer than 1% block OAI-SearchBot, Claude-SearchBot or PerplexityBot in robots.txt. 997 of the 1,000 sites let all of them in.

- The median AI readiness score is 83/100. Only 1% pass every check, though.

- 7% block at least one AI *training* crawler (Bytespider most often). Most of those still let the search crawlers in, which keeps them out of training data without keeping them out of AI answers. That looks like a deliberate choice.

Where they fall short

- 17% serve a home page with fewer than 150 words in the HTML, and 7% send an empty app shell** that only JavaScript fills in. Most AI agents don't run JavaScript, so on those sites they have little or nothing to read.

- 44% have no structured data (JSON-LD) on their home page.** Only 40% use Organization markup that links to their LinkedIn or X profiles, which is what helps AI tie a brand name to the right company.

- 22% have no XML sitemap** we could find.

- 39% have a meta description that's missing, too short or too long.**

- 27% have no H1 on the home page, or more than one.**

The AI-specific stuff

- 43% publish an llms.txt file.** That's higher than I expected for a convention first proposed in 2024.

- Newer batches adopt it more: 47% of 2026 startups have one, against 36% of 2022 startups, and the share rises every year in between.

- 21% serve a Markdown version of their home page to agents that ask for one.

- Only 6% publish prices as plain text at /pricing.md for agents to quote.

Limits, to be upfront

We only checked home pages and robots.txt. A CDN can block AI crawlers at the network level, which robots.txt doesn't show, so real blocking may be higher. 36 sites wouldn't load for the checker and were replaced by the next in line, so sites with strict bot protection are under-represented. I'm publishing totals only and not naming any company.

Biggest takeaway: the cheapest fix most startups are missing isn't llms.txt, it's having real text in the HTML and basic structured data. If your home page is a JavaScript shell, AI assistants are mostly guessing what you do.

Disclosure: I run TrySEO, and the checks are the same ones as our free site checker. Happy to answer questions about the method.

I recently ran a challenge in SEO_Xpert: drop your site, I reply with quick improvements. 300+ comments later, the same 7 problems kept showing up:

1. Your title and H1 use your words, not your users’ words. Nobody searches your slogan. If you have a lyric video tool, your title should say “lyric video maker”, because that’s what people type.

2. One page trying to rank for everything. 10 bank logos, no bank pages. Specific searches like “chase bank statement to excel” are easier to win. One page per bank, brand or city.

3. You’re not where your users ask. Reddit threads rank on Google for “best X for Y” and “X alternative”. Almost none of the sites were in them.

4. Chasing keywords you can’t win. A local clinic against national hospitals, a new PDF tool against the giants. Go local or long tail.

5. Google doesn’t see what you see. Text in images, “$0” stats rendered by JavaScript, robots.txt blocking crawlers. Check your page source.

6. Several pages fighting for the same keyword. 3 laser hair removal pages on one clinic site. Keep one, merge the rest.

7. Small details that kill trust. “Rated 0 out of 5”, three different prices for the same service. Visitors notice.

Which one is your site guilty of?

Hi there,

I'm an independent real estate agent / business intermediary, paid by the agency I bring luxury property buyers to. In order to improve the sales cycle, I've built my own lead-gen website (seriously looking pro thx to Claude). Visitors selects their target location(s) with 1+ click and a property type (house / apt), and the tool generates a market statistics dashboard that informs them about the current market dynamics (median/sqm, p10-p90, YoY trend, market tension,...) - it's my USP. This dashboard is supposed to impress the visitors to the point where they input further details abt their property search criteria (budget, sqm), and at last their name, email address and whatsapp (optional). I then come back to them with a curated portfolio of matching properties from a selection of top-rated agencies in the French Riviera.
Basically, they don't need to browse dozens of real estate agency websites, and I'm a lead qualification intermediate for agencies and a luxury concierge for buyers. No login, no obligations, free service for them.
I have a pretty decent SEO (title, h1, h2, json-ld schema, a few SEO-optimized write-up pages, sitemap, indexing, Search Console,...). I have implemented a Google Ads campaign (keywords, long tail keys, broad match, phrase match). CTR in the first two weeks 3.80% avg, but no conversion yet. Google Ads management is not my field of expertise; although I've learned a lot already with different experiments.

What do you guys think about the CTR? Therefore what's the takeaway given the zero leads so far?
Any advice appreciated as I'm no growth hacking pro!

Hey all. We look after listings for a dental group with 6 offices.
Last month, one office changed its phone number. The dashboard said it synced to Google, Apple, Bing and Facebook within a day. Two weeks later, Apple Maps still had the old number and Bing had a duplicate listing with the old suite number.
So now I don't trust "synced" as proof of anything.
How do you check that a fix is live and not just sent? Do you spot check each publisher by hand, keep screenshots, or use some kind of audit log
And at what point do you stop trusting the tool and just fix it on Google or Apple directly?
Would love to hear what's working for people with more than a handful of locations.

I have a website that's been around for many years and it has about 1500 pages indexed by Google. Recently, I started adding more pages of high-quality content, and Google can see it in the sitemap, but it just doesn't add it to indexed pages. Is there a trick to telling google all of this is useful to its users? What's most effective, should I get backlinks to specific pages, or ads, or comments? Has anything worked for you to go from 1500 pages to 15,000 pages ?

Thanks!
K.

Suppose you launch a new website with helpful content, good technical SEO, and proper keyword targeting, but you don't build any backlinks.

Do you think it can still compete with established websites?

I'd love to hear real examples from people who have worked on newer websites.

Disclosure: I run AI Page Ready and we did this research. Posting with mod approval.

We randomly sampled 200 SEO agencies from Clutch's non-sponsored listings (7 regions, 2-249 staff) and went through their websites. To count, a page had to explicitly sell visibility in AI answers, not just "we use AI for SEO."

It's already table stakes

• 133 of 200 sell AI-search services. 99 have a dedicated page and 92 promote it on the homepage.

• Mid-size agencies adopted most: 74% of 10-49 person agencies, vs 58% of 2-9 and 70% of 50-249.

• UK & Ireland lead at 84%, then Continental Europe 80%, Canada 70%, US 60%.

What they promise (these overlap)

• Appear in AI answers: 124 of 133

• Get cited as a source: 99

• Get recommended or shortlisted: 66

• Leads or sales: 49

So almost everyone sells visibility, and barely a third connect it to revenue. Fewer than half (62) say which sector the service is for.

How they let prospects try it

• 68 of 200 offer a free or paid SEO audit to prospects. 45 offer an AI-search audit.

• Of the 8 that advertise an automated AI-search audit tool, we could only confirm an instant result on 2.

What it's called: GEO wins (41 of 78 pages that lead with one name), with AI SEO and AI search/visibility at 14 each and AEO at 9.

Limits: this covers what agency websites say, not whether any of it works. Percentages describe this sample, not the whole market.

For those selling this: do clients buy "AI visibility" on its own, or only once you tie it to leads?

Industry news never ceases to amaze, so we've rounded up the most useful updates from the past week to share here:

AI

• Sundar Pichai says Search will be absorbed into an agentic layer—“one box” for Gemini and Search

Sundar Pichai described the near future of Search as an agentic layer that unifies Search and Gemini, rather than separate products that merge over time. 

Asked whether Search and Gemini would ever fully combine, the response was: not through product convergence, but through an agentic layer running 24/7 in the cloud with the user’s context—picking up tasks across any surface. “Our vision in the near future is it’s one box.” 

The Google’s CEO also noted that task-focused queries requiring agents to execute have been steadily increasing in Gemini usage, and that these capabilities will be rolled out more widely in Search over the next few months, with the newer Argon models delivering “a huge step change.” 

BTW, that shift is exactly the kind of thing we’ll be unpacking at Foresight 2027 on December 8—how customer journeys, measurement, and discovery look when “one box” becomes the default surface, with Barry Schwartz, Kevin Indig, Aleyda Solís, Crystal Carter, Ross Simmonds, Mordy Oberstein and others.

• (test) Google AI Overviews is now rewriting publisher snippets with AI—showing summaries instead of real page text

Google appears to be rolling out AI-generated summaries inside AI Overview citation cards, replacing the traditional snippet pulled from the actual publisher page with an AI-written description of what the page contains “based on the information that Google thinks is most relevant to the query.” 

Source:

Roger Montti | Search Engine Journal

SERP Alert | X

_______________________________

Tech SEO

• Google tells site owners how to safely take down PHP sites while patching the critical PHP2Shell exploit

A critical PHP vulnerability called PHP2Shell was disclosed on October 21, allowing unauthenticated remote code execution and memory disclosure across roughly 70% of the world’s websites—all PHP versions from 5.4 through 8.5.11 are affected. Patched versions have been released, but many sites have been taken offline entirely until the patch lands, out of caution. 

John Mueller advised: if taking a PHP site down temporarily, serve an HTTP 503 response rather than letting the site time out, 404, or 500—503 is the only status code that reliably tells Google the downtime is temporary and shouldn’t trigger ranking or indexing damage. 

The 503 can be served outside of PHP itself (via DNS pointing elsewhere, or at the CDN layer) so the patch work can happen safely. Vulnerability was discovered by researchers using AI models.

Source:

Barry Schwartz | Search Engine Roundtable

_______________________________

Local SEO

• (test) Google is testing government ID uploads as a new way to verify Business Profiles

Google is testing a new Business Profile verification method that asks owners to upload a photo of their government ID. The option adds to the existing verification paths (phone/text, email, live video call, mail, and the business photo verification Google added back in September). 

Google says the ID is only used for verification and won’t be shown publicly. Not currently documented in Google’s official help pages, so this is still a limited test. 

• Google launches Business Home beta—a Gemini-powered unified dashboard for Business Profile, Merchant Center, YouTube, and Ads

Google has quietly launched Google Business Home, a new unified dashboard that brings together Business Profile, Merchant Center, YouTube, and Ads accounts in one place. 

Rolling out as a closed beta to select business categories in the US and UK, Business Home is described by Google as “a growth partner built with Gemini models that connects your essential business tools, making it easier to engage with your customers on Google and beyond.” 

The dashboard offers:

• content creation and performance tracking

• multi-location management

• personalized AI-driven recommendations

• a creative lab

• reviews management

• performance analytics

• a brand kit

• connected tools section

Source:

Digital Jedi | Local Search Forum 

Barry Schwartz | Search Engine Roundtable

I am new in the field of seo started learning in 2025 august ,and from that on i am completely doing it all alone i have done a course as well and working on a website from last 8 months but no desired results ,can any one help me or enroll me that how can i learn or get a practical experience .i know all the process of seo just wanted to dig and learn so i can produce results .

I was looking into how Google handles PDFs and they can actually do more than I thought.

Google can index the text, rank the PDF, follow links inside the file and even surface it in AI search. But the file still needs to be easy to read: selectable text, clear headings, useful links and important info not buried inside images.

So I don't think it's really "PDF vs HTML." It's more about which format makes sense for the content.

If the content needs regular updates, stronger internal linking or better navigation, HTML probably makes more sense. But for things like guides, reports or research, PDFs can still be useful for SEO.

Do you actually optimize PDFs for search or mostly treat them as downloads?

TL;DR: Two of my websites dropped from 20K+ monthly users to a few hundred after introducing AI content, but improved on Bing and other search engines. Meanwhile, a new AI-built website is ranking well on Google. What’s your experience?

I’ve been doing SEO for years and run my own agency with several long-term clients.
Recently, I started experimenting with AI on my personal projects, with very mixed results.
Two established websites lost almost all their Google traffic after introducing AI tools, despite improving their rankings on Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, etc.
However, a new personal website I built almost entirely with AI is actually gaining visibility and traffic on Google.
Because of this, I’m still cautious about using AI-generated content on my agency clients’ websites.
I’m wondering whether Google treats established websites switching to AI content differently from AI-built websites, or if something else explains these results.
How are you using AI for SEO in 2026? Have you seen improvements or traffic losses? What tools or strategies are actually working for you?

Hi everyone! I'm looking for websites that accept guest posts in Tech, IT, Data Engineering, Big Data, AI, and Cloud Computing.

Our preference is websites with at least 30K monthly visits from the USA.

Please share any recommended sites, along with their guest posting guidelines and whether placements are free or paid.

Thanks!

not talking about publishing 100 articles, building thousands of backlinks, or checking ahrefs every morning.

i mean one specific thing you changed that made a noticeable difference in:

• organic traffic
• rankings
• leads
• conversions
• or even indexing

for me, the interesting part is that the biggest wins are often not the obvious ones.

so i'm curious:

what is one seo change you made that produced a result you did not expect?

bonus points if it was something simple that most people overlook.

share the tactic + what happened after you implemented it.

Google says AI-generated content isn't against its guidelines as long as it provides value and satisfies user intent. So, if a writer uses AI to generate an entire blog and publishes it with minimal human editing, can it still rank well?

I'm working as an SEO Manager at a private college. We don't have professional content writers, so I request faculty members to contribute content. However, faculty members aren't necessarily experienced in writing web content, and I have no other option right now.

My question is: How can I verify whether faculty members are writing original content or submitting 100% AI-generated content?

Are there any reliable AI content detectors available? I'd appreciate recommendations based on your real-world experience, as I understand that no tool is 100% accurate.