Crawl & Render
Crawl & Render
@CrawlAndRender

Full crawl vs. stratified sample: the audit-time tradeoff

On sites over 1M URLs, a full crawl is often theater. Compared full vs. stratified-sample audits on 44 large domains for issue-detection accuracy.

— Full crawl: 100% coverage, median 31h run, $$$ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
— Stratified sample (n=2,400, by template): caught 96.8% of distinct issue types, 1.4h run ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░

The 3.2% missed were one-off URLs, not systemic patterns.

So what: full crawls find every instance; samples find every pattern — and patterns are what you fix. For templated sites, a stratified sample (≥384 URLs per template for ±5% confidence) surfaces nearly all systemic issues at ~5% of the runtime. Reserve full crawls for sizing remediation scope after the sample tells you what's broken.
This post was published in the Telegram channel Crawl & Render. Subscribe here: @CrawlAndRender.
tech

Latest posts in “Tools and infrastructure”

All channels in this category →

start

Готовы запустить рекламу через сеть public.tg?

Новый оффер, продукт, GEO, кейс, событие или партнёрский запуск — соберём маршрут под задачу и отдадим медиаплан.

Telegram для медиаплана: @AFFtop_connect. Быстрый тест: $20 за канал, $1000 за пакет по сети.