Content Audit Tool
A content audit helps you understand what content exists, its quality, and what should happen to it. This tool provides a framework for conducting and organizing your audit.
Last updated: September 2025
When to conduct a content audit
- Redesign or migration: Before moving content to a new system
- Content strategy work: When developing or refining content strategy
- Quality assessment: To evaluate content health across a site
- Governance setup: When establishing content maintenance processes
- SEO review: To identify content gaps and opportunities
Audit types
Quantitative audit (inventory)
What exists? A comprehensive list of all content:
- URLs/locations
- Content types
- Metadata
- Basic metrics
Good for: Understanding scope, identifying orphan content, migration planning
Qualitative audit (assessment)
How good is it? Evaluation of content quality:
- Accuracy and currency
- Usefulness to users
- Alignment with goals
- Writing quality
- Accessibility
Good for: Identifying content to improve, retire, or prioritize
Strategic audit
Does it serve our goals? Analysis of content against strategy:
- User journey coverage
- Business goal alignment
- Competitor comparison
- Gap analysis
Good for: Content strategy development, prioritization
Full audits of large sites take significant time. Consider auditing a representative sample or focusing on high-traffic/high-priority areas first.
Content inventory template
For each piece of content, capture:
Basic information
| Field | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| ID | Unique identifier | C-001 |
| URL | Page location | /about/team |
| Title | Page/content title | Our Team |
| Content type | Article, landing page, etc. | About page |
| Format | Text, video, PDF, etc. | Text with images |
| Owner | Responsible person/team | Marketing |
Metadata
| Field | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Created date | When first published | 2023-06-15 |
| Last updated | Most recent edit | 2024-01-20 |
| Author | Who created it | J. Smith |
| Word count | Length indicator | 850 |
| Meta title | SEO title | Meet the Team - Company |
| Meta description | SEO description | Meet the people behind... |
Metrics (if available)
| Field | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Page views | Traffic | 2,400/month |
| Avg. time on page | Engagement | 2:15 |
| Bounce rate | Exit percentage | 45% |
| Conversions | Goal completions | 12 |
| Search ranking | SERP position | #8 for "company team" |
Content assessment criteria
Rate each piece of content:
Accuracy
Is the information correct and current?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| ✓ Pass | All information is accurate |
| △ Needs update | Minor inaccuracies or outdated details |
| ✗ Fail | Significant errors or completely outdated |
Usefulness
Does this help users accomplish their goals?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| High | Directly serves clear user needs |
| Medium | Somewhat useful but not essential |
| Low | Minimal value to users |
Quality
Is this well-written and well-presented?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| Good | Well-structured, clear, engaging |
| Acceptable | Functional but could be improved |
| Poor | Difficult to read, poorly organized |
Findability
Can users discover this content when needed?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| Good | Well-linked, searchable, logically placed |
| Acceptable | Accessible but not prominently featured |
| Poor | Difficult to find, orphaned, buried |
Accessibility
Is this content accessible to all users?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| ✓ Pass | Meets accessibility requirements |
| △ Partial | Some accessibility issues |
| ✗ Fail | Significant accessibility barriers |
Brand alignment
Does this reflect current brand voice and standards?
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| Aligned | Matches brand guidelines |
| Partially | Some deviation from standards |
| Misaligned | Doesn't reflect current brand |
Recommended actions
Based on assessment, assign an action:
| Action | When to use |
|---|---|
| Keep | Content is good, no changes needed |
| Improve | Content is valuable but needs updates |
| Consolidate | Multiple pieces covering same topic—combine |
| Rewrite | Topic is needed but content is poor |
| Archive | Content is outdated but has historical value |
| Delete | Content provides no value, remove |
| Create | Gap identified—new content needed |
Conducting the audit
Step 1: Define scope
- What content is included? (All pages? Blog only? Top 100 pages?)
- What criteria matter most?
- What questions are you trying to answer?
Step 2: Inventory
Collect basic information for all content in scope. Use site crawlers to speed up URL collection. Export from CMS if possible.
Step 3: Assess
Work through content systematically:
- Set consistent criteria before starting
- Use the same evaluators for consistency (or calibrate across evaluators)
- Don't try to do everything in one sitting
Step 4: Analyze
Look for patterns:
- What content types perform best?
- Where are the quality gaps?
- What's outdated?
- What's missing?
Step 5: Prioritize
Rank content for action based on:
- Traffic/importance
- Effort to fix
- Strategic value
- Quick wins vs. long-term projects
Step 6: Document and track
Create a plan with:
- Specific actions for each content piece
- Owner assignments
- Timelines
- Success criteria
Spreadsheets work well for most audits. For larger sites, consider dedicated tools like Screaming Frog (for crawling), Content Insight, or Airtable for collaborative tracking.
Content audit spreadsheet structure
A practical spreadsheet setup:
Tab 1: Inventory All content items with basic information and metrics
Tab 2: Assessment Quality ratings linked to inventory items
Tab 3: Action plan Prioritized list with actions, owners, and status
Tab 4: Dashboard Summary statistics and progress tracking
It depends on scope. A quick inventory of 100 pages might take a day. A full qualitative audit of a large site could take weeks. Scope to available time and prioritize strategically.
Content strategists, editors, and subject matter experts are ideal. For large audits, train multiple people to ensure consistency. Include diverse perspectives—what's clear to one person may confuse another.
Major audits every 1-2 years. Continuous monitoring (checking newly published content, reviewing analytics) should happen ongoing. Some organizations audit rolling sections quarterly.
Inventory your top 20 pages (by traffic or importance). Assess accuracy and usefulness. Assign one action to each. That's often enough to drive meaningful improvements.
Assess it the same way. You may need to consult with original owners for context, but evaluation criteria should be consistent regardless of authorship.