content
How to fix: Quantified proof claim present
Part of the Content Quality pillar on the Site Integrity Index.
Why this matters
Concrete numbers ("200+ checks", "98% compliant", "10 years auditing") outperform adjectives ("comprehensive", "expert", "trusted") on both reader trust and scannability. Adjectives are cheap; numbers demand evidence.
Background
What it checks: claims on the page are backed by actual numbers, not vague qualifiers like "many" or "most." Why it matters: quantified claims are both more useful to readers and more likely to be the exact sentence an AI system lifts into a citation — vague claims don't get quoted because they don't say anything specific.
References
Editorial content-quality signal — quantified-claim heuristic. AI citation systems disproportionately lift sentences containing specific numbers over vague ones.
How to fix
Replace vague language with real numbers wherever you have them — check counts, percentages, response times, dates. If you don't have a real number, that's a sign the claim needs more evidence before it's made at all. "most sites fail" → "7 out of every 10 sites we scan fail". "quickly" → "within 20 seconds".
Verify it's working
Read every claim on the page. If it uses "many," "most," "often," "quickly," or a similar vague quantifier, either back it with a number or cut it.
Want to know if your site has this issue?
Run a free audit — security, GDPR, technical SEO, AEO/GEO, and WCAG accessibility.
Audit my site →