Technical SEO Services Guide for Migrations & Performance

If rankings are flat, pages aren’t indexing, or your site feels slow and “mystery bugs” keep returning after releases, you’re in the right place.

This guide explains exactly what technical SEO services cover, how they’re delivered, what they cost, and how to choose a provider. Proof of impact: a mid‑market ecommerce brand lifted organic revenue 38% in 90 days by fixing crawl waste, consolidating duplicate URLs, and improving INP.

Overview

Technical SEO is the engineering layer of SEO—everything that enables search engines to discover, render, and index your content reliably and fast. It covers crawlability, site architecture, performance, structured data, canonicalization, JavaScript rendering, and signals like robots directives and sitemaps.

Google’s SEO Starter concepts emphasize making content discoverable, accessible, and understandable to search engines and users alike; see Google Search Central’s SEO starter guide for fundamentals (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/seo-starter-guide).

Hire a technical SEO company when problems exceed simple plugin fixes, when you’re planning a redesign or platform migration, or when JavaScript frameworks, faceted navigation, or multi‑regional architectures complicate crawling and rendering.

DIY can work for smaller WordPress sites with limited templates and clean plugin stacks, but complex ecosystems benefit from specialists who can work with developers, logs, and QA.

Outcomes to expect: more of the right pages indexed, higher crawl efficiency, faster experiences that meet Core Web Vitals, and cleaner signals that support rankings and revenue.

What technical SEO includes (and what it doesn’t)

Technical SEO includes the systems and signals that help bots reach the right content and users experience it well.

That means robots.txt and meta robots governance, XML sitemaps, canonicalization, redirects, hreflang implementation, site architecture, internal linking, structured data implementation, JavaScript SEO (CSR/SSR/SSG), performance engineering for Core Web Vitals, HTTPS/security, and monitoring bot behavior via crawl stats and log file analysis.

It does not include writing blog posts, building backlinks, or conversion copy—those are content and off‑page disciplines.

It also isn’t analytics setup in isolation; instrumentation supports technical work, but technical SEO’s job is to make your existing and future content discoverable, indexable, and fast. Good providers collaborate with content and PR teams to ensure technical changes amplify—not replace—those efforts.

When you need technical SEO: common symptoms and quick self-checks

If you’re not sure whether you need expert help, start with quick checks to confirm patterns instead of hunches.

1. Index coverage issues: In Google Search Console, look for spikes in “Alternate page with proper canonical,” “Crawled – currently not indexed,” or soft 404s; sample a few URLs to confirm true duplicates or thin templates.
2. Core Web Vitals failures: Check CWV in Search Console’s Experience reports; if LCP > 2.5s, INP > 200ms, or CLS > 0.1 at scale, performance engineering is needed.
3. JavaScript rendering gaps: Use “URL Inspection → View crawled page” in Search Console; if critical content/links are missing in the rendered HTML or require user interaction, bots may not see them.
4. Crawl anomalies: Run a crawl of your site; look for endless parameter/facet URLs, calendar loops, or pagination traps. Correlate with server logs for high Googlebot hits on low‑value paths.
5. Migration drop-offs: After a redesign/domain/CMS change, watch for 404 spikes, redirect chains, template canonical errors, or missing internal links.

If two or more symptoms show up consistently, you’ll benefit from a structured audit and prioritized implementation plan.

Deliverables and process: from audit to implementation

Technical SEO services work best with a predictable flow from discovery to QA and ongoing monitoring. Expect clear artifacts, not just meetings, so your dev and content teams can act with confidence.

Typical deliverables include:

1. Audit issue log with evidence (affected URLs, screenshots/log lines), severity, business impact, and effort estimate.
2. An impact × effort × risk prioritization matrix and a 90‑day/180‑day roadmap.
3. Developer‑ready tickets (user stories, acceptance criteria) and test scripts for staging.
4. Tooling exports and snapshots (Search Console, crawler exports, performance lab/field data).
5. Governance docs (robots/sitemaps policies, canonical rules, parameter governance).

These outputs create shared context, enable sprint planning, and prevent regressions by specifying how fixes will be validated before and after release.

Discovery and scoping

Discovery aligns objectives, constraints, and the technical context so work targets business outcomes. A good kickoff inventories platforms (e.g., WordPress, Shopify, headless), hosting/CDN, deployment pipelines, team capacity, and available data (Search Console, analytics, customer journey metrics).

It also clarifies target markets (local, national, international), revenue levers (collections vs. PDPs, location pages), and risk sensitivity around releases.

Scoping then translates findings into a right‑sized engagement: what’s in phase one vs. later, who owns what, and how success will be measured. The result is a scope doc with timelines, dependencies, and reporting cadence your stakeholders can sign off on.

Comprehensive technical audit

The audit validates how bots discover, render, and index pages—and how users experience them. It blends a full‑site crawl (templates, status codes, canonicals, internal linking), server log file analysis (what Googlebot actually crawls), and rendering checks for JavaScript frameworks to see if critical content and links appear without interaction.

For performance, combine lab tests for diagnostics with field data (CrUX/Search Console) to capture real‑user Core Web Vitals at scale.

Each finding should include evidence and reproduction steps, then be validated across templates to avoid one‑off fixes.

For example, a canonical issue on a single color variant likely exists across all variants; a single fix in the template can resolve thousands of URLs.

Prioritization framework (impact × effort × risk)

Not all fixes are equal; prioritize what moves revenue and reduces risk first.

1. Impact: Expected lift to indexation, rankings, and conversions (score 1–5).
2. Effort: Dev/design/ops complexity and dependencies (score 1–5).
3. Risk: Chance of negative side effects or rollback complexity (score 1–5).

Multiply and sort. High‑impact/low‑effort/low‑risk items (e.g., sitemap cleanup, canonical alignment) lead early sprints; high‑impact/high‑risk items (e.g., rendering strategy shifts) get deeper QA and phased rollout.

Implementation and QA

Implementation should mirror your engineering workflows: Git‑based branches, feature flags, and staging environments that match production. For crawling/indexation changes, test robots.txt and meta robots rules in staging and confirm you’re not blocking essential assets (JS/CSS).

Before release, run smoke tests: template‑level canonicals/headers, redirect rules, structured data validation, and Core Web Vitals spot checks. After release, validate fixes with targeted recrawls, Search Console URL Inspection, and log sampling to ensure bots behave as intended.

Monitoring and reporting

Define KPIs upfront: index coverage (valid pages, duplicates reduced), CWV pass rate, crawl stats (hits to valuable vs. low‑value paths), and business metrics like organic conversions and revenue.

Report weekly during implementation with a change log and blockers, then monthly with KPI trends and next‑sprint priorities.

Pair quantitative dashboards with qualitative notes so stakeholders connect fixes to outcomes. For example, “Canonical alignment cut duplicate indexation by 62%, enabling +14% more PDP impressions in Discoverable status.”

Pricing, timelines, and ROI expectations

Budgets vary with site size, complexity, and how much implementation your provider handles. Pricing is also influenced by JavaScript rendering needs, multi‑language setups, and the volume of templates and integrations.

Typical ranges by complexity:

1. SMB (WordPress/small Shopify): $3k–$8k for a technical SEO audit; $2k–$10k for implementation; 4–10 weeks total.
2. Mid‑market (custom WP/Shopify + apps/ecommerce): $8k–$25k audit; $10k–$60k implementation; 8–16 weeks total.
3. Enterprise (headless/JS, international, millions of URLs): $25k–$75k+ audit; implementation can exceed $100k across phases; 12–24+ weeks.

Expect to see leading indicators (index coverage, CWV pass rate) within 2–6 weeks of fixes, and revenue impact in 1–3 cycles post‑indexing.

To estimate ROI, model incremental organic revenue = (baseline organic revenue) × (expected traffic lift) × (conversion rate) × (AOV).

Scope creep often comes from unplanned platform work, app/theme rewrites, or cross‑team dependencies—lock acceptance criteria and sprint capacity early.

Platform-specific considerations: WordPress, Shopify, and headless/JavaScript sites

Every platform has quirks; solving them quickly avoids chasing symptoms. Start with a platform reality check and tailor your roadmap to expected pitfalls.

1. WordPress: Theme bloat, render‑blocking assets, and plugin conflicts commonly hurt site speed optimization and CLS. Streamline plugins, defer non‑critical JS, and optimize hero media. Watch duplicate archives (category/tag/date) and thin attachment pages—use noindex on low‑value archives and align canonicals.
2. Shopify: Duplicate URLs across /products/, /collections/, and with/without query params demand canonicalization and internal link consistency. Apps often inject scripts that inflate INP/CLS, so audit app necessity and load order. For large catalogs, manage faceted navigation and pagination carefully to prevent crawl budget management issues.
3. Headless/JavaScript (React/Vue/Angular): JavaScript SEO hinges on rendering strategy—prefer SSR/SSG or hybrid islands. Avoid content that only appears after user interaction. Ensure meta tags, canonicals, and sitemaps are generated server‑side, and mitigate hydration delays that degrade INP.

After platform triage, prioritize changes that unblock crawling and fix rendering, then scale performance and internal linking improvements for compounding gains.

Performance and Core Web Vitals

Performance affects how much of your site gets crawled, how users convert, and how pages rank.

Google’s Core Web Vitals define user‑centric performance thresholds: “good” LCP ≤ 2.5s, INP ≤ 200ms, and CLS ≤ 0.1 across real users (see thresholds at https://web.dev/vitals/).

Importantly, Interaction to Next Paint (INP) replaced FID as a Core Web Vital in 2024 (https://web.dev/inp/).

Key optimization levers:

1. TTFB: Use a fast CDN, server‑side caching, and reduce origin latency with edge rendering where possible.
2. LCP: Optimize hero images (next‑gen formats, proper sizing), inline critical CSS, and preload key resources.
3. INP: Break up long tasks, minimize heavy third‑party scripts, and optimize input handlers and hydration timing.
4. CLS: Reserve space for media/ads, set width/height attributes, and avoid injecting late‑loading UI.

Treat CWV as ongoing engineering, not a one‑off project. Use lab tools for diagnosis and field data to confirm wins at scale.

Crawlability and indexation control

Guiding crawlers to high‑value URLs and consolidating duplicates is core to technical SEO services. The goal is to spend crawl budget on pages that can rank, ensure one canonical per intent, and keep low‑value or boilerplate paths out of the index.

Start by aligning signals: robots directives, sitemaps, internal links, and canonicals must tell the same story.

Then address duplicate patterns at the template and routing level instead of patching individual URLs.

Finally, validate with server logs to confirm Googlebot is spending time where it counts.

robots.txt and meta robots

robots.txt controls crawl access; meta robots controls indexation. Disallow crawling of explicitly low‑value system paths (e.g., admin, search results) but avoid blocking essential assets (JS/CSS) that Google needs for rendering; see the robots.txt intro (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/robots/intro).

Use meta robots “noindex” on thin archives or parameter pages you can’t remove, and prefer “noindex, follow” when you still want link equity to flow.

Common mistakes include disallowing all parameterized URLs that contain necessary variants, accidentally blocking staging in production, or using robots.txt to try to deindex URLs (it won’t—noindex does).

XML sitemaps that scale

Sitemaps advertise index‑worthy URLs, not inventory everything. Include only canonical, 200‑status URLs you want indexed; keep them fresh and update lastmod dates when meaningful changes occur.

For large sites, split sitemaps by type or directory and use a sitemap index; see Google’s sitemaps overview (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/sitemaps/overview). Automate generation as part of your deploy pipeline so new content is discoverable fast, and monitor indexation deltas between sitemaps and Search Console coverage.

Canonicalization and duplicate consolidation

Canonicals should match how users and internal links reference the “one best” URL per intent. Consolidate duplicates from parameters, session IDs, and alternate paths by aligning rel=canonical, redirects, and internal links.

For cross‑domain or protocol/host changes, ensure canonicals and redirects agree to avoid mixed signals; Google’s guidance on consolidating duplicate URLs is helpful (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/consolidate-duplicate-urls).

At scale, fix at the template/routing level and avoid “self‑canonical to everything” or pointing canonicals to non‑equivalent pages.

Faceted navigation and parameter governance

Uncontrolled facets create combinatorial URL explosions that waste crawl budget. Whitelist a minimal set of indexable facets (e.g., category + key filter), keep the rest “noindex, follow,” and avoid linking to low‑value combinations.

Use consistent parameter ordering, avoid infinite calendars, and prefer server‑side rules that collapse equivalent states into a single canonical URL.

Pair this with sitemap discipline so bots always have a clean discovery path for your most valuable combinations.

Crawl budget and log file insights

Crawl budget matters for large or frequently updated sites. Analyze server logs to see where Googlebot spends time; flag high‑hit/low‑value paths (endless filters, paginated depths, system files) and address with robots, canonicals, or decommissioned URLs (410).

Correlate log trends with Search Console crawl stats to quantify savings from cleanup. Aim to shift crawl allocation toward fresh, indexable content and critical templates. Over time, you should see shallower crawl depths to important areas and faster discovery of new pages.

Structured data for richer SERP results

Structured data helps search engines understand your entities and can unlock rich results. Implement only schema types that align with your content and eligibility, then validate with the Rich Results Test and monitor Search Console enhancements.

High‑impact schema to consider:

1. Organization/LocalBusiness: Brand details, locations, hours, and reviews for local technical SEO visibility.
2. Product/Offer/Review: Prices, availability, and ratings for ecommerce technical SEO.
3. FAQ: Eligible informational blocks that can expand SERP real estate when content truly answers user questions.
4. Article/BlogPosting: Publisher metadata and images for content hubs.

Keep markup in sync with visible content—misrepresentation invites manual actions and hurts trust.

Site architecture and internal linking at scale

A scalable information architecture groups content by intent and topic, keeping important pages within a few clicks. Use clean, hierarchical URL structures and directory hints that reflect your taxonomy.

Reinforce relevance with contextual internal links from category hubs to child pages and back, and add breadcrumbs to improve discoverability and user navigation.

Treat pagination and filtering deliberately. Ensure paginated series are crawlable with logical linking between pages, and avoid orphan pages by tying every important template into at least one hub and the sitemap. Regularly crawl for low‑inlinks pages and strengthen their internal paths.

International SEO and localization

International SEO relies on accurate hreflang implementation, consistent canonicalization, and a clear architecture for languages and regions. Use correct language‑region codes (e.g., en‑US, en‑GB), reciprocal hreflang annotations among alternates, and x‑default where appropriate.

Canonicals should point to self‑versions within each locale, and sitemaps can carry hreflang clusters for scale. Avoid auto‑redirecting users based solely on IP, which can block crawling and indexing of alternates. Maintain content parity across locales as much as possible; significant template or navigation differences can confuse bots and users.

Secure, compliant, and accessible by default

HTTPS is table stakes and a lightweight ranking signal—Google announced HTTPS as a ranking signal in 2014 (https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2014/08/https-as-ranking-signal). Enforce HSTS, redirect HTTP→HTTPS, and standardize canonical hosts to prevent duplication.

Add sensible security headers (e.g., CSP, X‑Content‑Type‑Options) and keep dependencies up to date. Accessibility (WCAG) overlaps with UX and Core Web Vitals. Clear focus states, semantic HTML, alt text, and predictable layouts reduce CLS and improve usability, which tends to lift engagement and conversions. Bake accessibility checks into QA so you’re not trading speed for inclusivity.

SEO for site migrations and redesigns

Migrations concentrate risk—done well, they preserve and often improve performance; done poorly, they erase years of gains.

Plan months ahead, map every URL, and test relentlessly. Also ensure responsive redesigns maintain parity now that mobile‑first indexing is complete (Oct 2023), so mobile and desktop content/signals match (https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2023/10/mfi-complete).

Pre‑ and post‑launch essentials:

1. Pre‑launch: Full URL map and 301 plan; staging blocked from indexing; replicate robots/meta/canonicals; carry over structured data; performance budgets; sitemap ready; analytics and Search Console verified.
2. Launch day: Deploy redirects, push updated sitemaps, verify canonical and hreflang integrity, spot‑check top templates and money pages, and monitor logs for 404/500 spikes.
3. First 2 weeks: Reprocess sitemaps, fix redirect chains/loops, address any soft 404s, and request re‑crawls for critical URLs.
4. Rollback triggers: Severe 404 spikes, mis‑canonicalization of key templates, robots errors blocking essential paths; prepare a rollback plan per change set, not the entire launch.

Close the loop with a post‑mortem and a hardening sprint to prevent regressions.

Governance, QA, and ongoing maintenance

Healthy technical SEO depends on governance as much as fixes. Establish change management with dev teams: acceptance criteria for SEO tickets, staging/prod parity checks, and a release checklist that covers robots, sitemaps, canonicals, redirects, and structured data.

Automate tests where possible—lint meta tags, verify robots states, and run scheduled crawls after releases.

Set SLAs for issue triage and define a steady maintenance rhythm: monthly crawls, quarterly performance deep‑dives, and continuous monitoring of index coverage and CWV.

Share a running changelog so business stakeholders connect technical work to measurable outcomes.

How to evaluate a technical SEO provider

Choosing well saves months. Use this scorecard to compare a technical SEO consultant, in‑house candidates, or agencies.

1. Skills and proof: Look for documented wins tied to technical fixes (e.g., CWV pass rate lift, duplicate consolidation, crawl budget savings) with before/after metrics and URLs.
2. Tool stack and transparency: They should work fluently with Search Console, crawlers, log file analysis, RUM/lab testing, and issue tracking—no “black box” methods.
3. Process and artifacts: Ask for sample audit logs, prioritization matrices, developer tickets, and QA plans that map to your platform.
4. Platform fluency: WordPress technical SEO, technical SEO for Shopify stores, and headless/JavaScript SEO require different playbooks—ask for platform‑specific examples.
5. Collaboration and governance: Expect sprint‑friendly workflows, acceptance criteria, and regression testing; they should integrate with your dev/PM tools.
6. Security and compliance: Experience with HTTPS migrations, security headers, and accessibility/WCAG is a plus; enterprise buyers should expect SOC‑aware practices.
7. Reporting and KPIs: Clear cadence, executive summaries tied to business metrics, and a change log; no vanity metrics without context.
8. Red flags: Guaranteed rankings, disinterest in logs/QA, reluctance to share sample deliverables, or a link‑only “strategy.”
9. In‑house vs. agency vs. hybrid: In‑house shines for high‑change environments with dedicated dev capacity; agencies excel for audits, migrations, and cross‑platform expertise; hybrid models pair internal execution with senior external oversight for governance and spikes in workload.

A good partner leaves you with durable systems, not dependency.

FAQs

1. Technical SEO services pricing: Most audits range from $3k–$75k+ based on complexity; implementation can equal or exceed audit costs depending on dev scope and timelines.
2. What does a technical SEO audit include?: A crawl and rendering assessment, log file analysis, indexation/canonical review, performance (Core Web Vitals) analysis, structured data checks, and a prioritized roadmap with developer‑ready tickets.
3. How long does technical SEO take?: Expect 2–6 weeks for a full audit, 4–16 weeks for phased fixes, and 4–12 additional weeks to see stable organic impact after re‑crawling and indexing.
4. Technical SEO vs on‑page SEO: Technical SEO is about infrastructure (crawling, rendering, performance); on‑page focuses on content relevance (titles, copy, internal links) and user intent.
5. Which Core Web Vitals matter most today?: LCP, INP, and CLS are the focus; aim for LCP ≤ 2.5s, INP ≤ 200ms, and CLS ≤ 0.1 according to Google’s thresholds.
6. How to improve INP web vitals?: Reduce long tasks, optimize event handlers, defer non‑critical scripts, and minimize main‑thread work and hydration bottlenecks.
7. How should JavaScript‑heavy sites handle rendering?: Prefer SSR/SSG or hybrid strategies so bots receive HTML with critical content/links; ensure meta tags and canonicals render server‑side.
8. What is crawl budget and how do I fix crawl waste?: It’s how many pages bots crawl over time; reduce waste by blocking low‑value paths, consolidating duplicates, and fixing crawl traps identified in server logs.
9. How to manage canonicalization and parameters for faceted navigation?: Whitelist indexable combinations, use self‑canonicals for valid states, “noindex, follow” for the rest, and align internal links and sitemaps to canonical targets.
10. What does a safe migration plan include?: URL mapping and 301s, parity of content/meta/structured data, performance budgets, staging QA, sitemap updates, and rollback criteria with active log monitoring.
11. When should I use hreflang?: Use it for true language/region alternates; ensure reciprocal tags, correct codes, and self‑canonicals within each locale to avoid conflicts.
12. Which KPIs prove technical SEO ROI?: Index coverage improvements, CWV pass rate, crawl allocation to valuable paths, and bottom‑line metrics like organic conversions and revenue; tie changes to a dated change log.
13. Do you handle penalty recovery?: Yes—technical audits often uncover thin/duplicate content, crawl traps, or structured data abuse contributing to issues; pair cleanup with quality content and reconsideration where needed.