Research

WordPress AI readiness statistics

In October 2026, we could only tell which sites run on WordPress where our scanner could read the page, so this page covers those sites and says nothing about how many turned our scanner away.

Updated 20:07 UTC · October 2026

Based on the sites Bot Appétit has scanned: ones people chose to scan, plus lists we scan for research. Not a random sample of the web.

All sites on the State of the Web

How WordPress sites land

Chef's kiss 30%
Cleans the plate 54%
Needs seasoning 13%
Undercooked 3%
Sent back to the kitchen 0%

Share of WordPress sites in each verdict tier
Verdict	Share of sites
Chef's kiss	30%
Cleans the plate	54%
Needs seasoning	13%
Undercooked	3%
Sent back to the kitchen	0%

Based on the sites Bot Appétit has scanned: ones people chose to scan, plus lists we scan for research. Not a random sample of the web.

Better or worse

Not enough history yet.

Based on the sites Bot Appétit has scanned: ones people chose to scan, plus lists we scan for research. Not a random sample of the web.

AI access

robots.txt disallows some AI crawlers 8%
robots.txt disallows major AI crawlers 2%

How WordPress sites treat AI crawlers
What we found	Share of sites
robots.txt disallows some AI crawlers	8%
robots.txt disallows major AI crawlers	2%

Based on the sites Bot Appétit has scanned: ones people chose to scan, plus lists we scan for research. Not a random sample of the web.

What WordPress sites get right and wrong

Passed more often than on the average site: “A machine-readable published / updated date” (74%, against 26% of all sites); “Structured data is present” (87%, against 64% of all sites); “This page declares its canonical URL” (95%, against 72% of all sites). Least often passed: “WebMCP tools in the page” (0%); “Web Bot Auth (operates a signed bot)” (0%); “Text-and-data-mining reservation (TDMRep)” (0%).

Every check, WordPress against all sites

Share of sites that pass each check. The Gap column is the difference in percentage points; a dash means not enough sites yet.

WordPress sites against all sites: share passing each check
Check	WordPress sites	All sites	Gap (points)
Served over a secure HTTPS connection	>99%	99%	+1%
HTTP redirects to HTTPS	84%	87%	−3%
No mixed (insecure) content	96%	98%	−2%
Core security headers are set	10%	19%	−9%
Not flagged for malware or phishing	100%	100%	Level
No server version leakage	69%	84%	−15%
security.txt is published	5%	9%	−4%
Reached without a redirect chain	100%	98%	+2%
Caching or validation headers are set	62%	88%	−26%
The site settles on one host (www vs non-www)	83%	75%	+8%
robots.txt is present and not over-blocking	95%	88%	+7%
Not accidentally set to noindex	98%	98%	Level
This page declares its canonical URL	95%	72%	+23%
Mobile viewport is set	87%	87%	Level
Has a title tag	100%	>99%	Level
Title fits a search snippet	56%	54%	+2%
Has a meta description	71%	73%	−2%
Description fits a search snippet	79%	70%	+9%
The page has an H1	67%	71%	−4%
Logical heading order	51%	61%	−10%
Topic is consistent across title, H1 and description	51%	55%	−4%
Images have descriptive alt text	90%	87%	+3%
Your page's HTML isn't oversized	99%	98%	+1%
Open Graph tags for sharing	62%	53%	+9%
Twitter/X card tags	66%	72%	−6%
XML sitemap is present and referenced	78%	72%	+6%
Missing pages return a real 404	81%	85%	−4%
Images are optimised	33%	31%	+2%
Language and charset declared	99%	93%	+6%
hreflang for language variants	100%	98%	+2%
Analytics is installed	75%	60%	+15%
Search Console / Bing verification	69%	74%	−5%
A favicon is set	96%	96%	Level
No meta-refresh redirect	99%	>99%	−1%
Your content survives without JavaScript	>99%	93%	+7%
Your answer is in the HTML	99%	92%	+7%
Buttons, links and fields have names	35%	53%	−18%
Semantic HTML landmarks	53%	58%	−5%
Content is scannable in self-contained chunks	99%	89%	+10%
Claims come with figures, quotes or sources	34%	43%	−9%
Section headings are phrased as questions	26%	29%	−3%
Author / publisher is clear	75%	57%	+18%
A machine-readable published / updated date	74%	26%	+48%
llms.txt is present and valid	30%	31%	−1%
Clean content for agents (Markdown)	1%	7%	−6%
Structured data is present	87%	64%	+23%
Structured data is valid	98%	98%	Level
FAQ / Q&A schema	47%	52%	−5%
Organization schema with sameAs	42%	31%	+11%
Right schema type for the page	95%	89%	+6%
Schema facts also appear in the page text	36%	57%	−21%
Breadcrumb structured data	—	30%	—
AI crawlers aren't blocked	86%	85%	+1%
Automated visitors can reach your pages	100%	100%	Level
Engines are allowed to quote the page	99%	98%	+1%
Your page arrives quickly	72%	89%	−17%
AI bot rules are explicit and intentional	15%	20%	−5%
Content usage preferences declared	6%	7%	−1%
Resource-discovery Link headers	1%	4%	−3%
No broken links	70%	84%	−14%
Links don't point at redirects	70%	83%	−13%
Descriptive anchor text	>99%	99%	+1%
Sensible internal/external link mix	98%	95%	+3%
Links are real links	83%	89%	−6%
Largest Contentful Paint (LCP)	—	—	—
Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS)	—	—	—
Interaction to Next Paint (INP)	—	—	—
Page weight and render-blocking	—	—	—
MCP Server Card	0%	3%	−3%
AI catalog	0%	2%	−2%
A2A Agent Card	0%	1%	−1%
WebMCP tools in the page	0%	1%	−1%
AI usage preferences (Content-Usage)	0%	<1%	Level
Licensing terms for AI (RSL)	0%	<1%	Level
Text-and-data-mining reservation (TDMRep)	0%	<1%	Level
Markdown version linked from the page	1%	4%	−3%
Content signals agree everywhere	—	—	—
Agent Skills index	0%	2%	−2%
API catalog	0%	2%	−2%
OAuth authorization-server metadata	10%	8%	+2%
OAuth protected-resource metadata	10%	6%	+4%
OpenID Connect discovery	3%	5%	−2%
Web Bot Auth (operates a signed bot)	0%	<1%	Level
Universal Commerce Protocol manifest	—	—	—
Auth.md agent registration	0%	1%	−1%
AI discovery via DNS	0%	<1%	Level

Based on the sites Bot Appétit has scanned: ones people chose to scan, plus lists we scan for research. Not a random sample of the web.

See how your site compares

A free scan checks all of this on your page in seconds, with no signup.

Scan your site free

Want it handled? We do that too. No pitch, just a plain-English chat.