A section-by-section audit of a landing-page draft that produces weighted scores, a prioritized fix list, and a ship/block decision. Use as a gate inside the LP ship workflow, runs after voice enforcement, before any synthetic-audience or live test.
Source synthesis: Peep Laja (Wynter, quantified message testing), Craig Sullivan (CRO audit framework), Joanna Wiebe (above-the-fold copy), Brian Massey (Conversion Sciences rubric), and the ai-marketing-claude market-landing 7-point framework.
When to use
- Any new LP draft before publish.
- Audit of an existing LP with declining CVR.
- Pricing page or comparison page revision.
- Pre-flight on paid-traffic landing pages.
The 7-section rubric
Each section scored 1–5 with rationale. Weights reflect conversion impact.
| Section | Weight | Scoring focus |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Hero | 25% | Headline clarity, CTA above fold, visual relevance, trust signal visible |
| 2. Value proposition | 20% | Outcome-specific, differentiates from alternatives, matches buyer language |
| 3. Social proof | 15% | Specificity of testimonials, logo trust, review count and recency |
| 4. Objection handling | 15% | Top 3 objections addressed, FAQ quality, pricing transparency |
| 5. CTA clarity | 10% | Button copy outcome-led (not "Submit"), placement, repetition |
| 6. Trust and risk reversal | 10% | Security badges, guarantees, refund policy, privacy commitment |
| 7. Page mechanics | 5% | Load-speed signals, mobile readiness, form-friction count |
Page-type thresholds
| Page type | Primary goal | Threshold (weighted) |
|---|---|---|
| SaaS trial signup | Free trial start | ≥ 3.8 |
| Demo request | Meeting booked | ≥ 3.5 |
| Lead capture | Email / form submit | ≥ 3.5 |
| Pricing page | Plan selection | ≥ 3.8 (CTA + objection weights doubled) |
| Feature comparison | Alternative displacement | ≥ 4.0 |
Process
- Identify page type, or infer from asset content.
- Score each section 1–5 with rationale.
- Compute weighted score.
- Identify the weakest section (lowest weighted contribution).
- Generate prioritized fix list: top 3 specific changes, highest impact first.
- Gate: if weighted < threshold, BLOCK with fix list. If hero scores 1 on any dimension, automatic BLOCK regardless of weighted score.
- Log the audit.
Output template
PASS / BLOCK — weighted score: X.X / 5.0
Section scores:
Hero (25%): N/5 — [key finding]
Value proposition (20%): N/5 — [key finding]
Social proof (15%): N/5 — [key finding]
Objection handling(15%): N/5 — [key finding]
CTA clarity (10%): N/5 — [key finding]
Trust/risk reversal(10%): N/5 — [key finding]
Page mechanics (5%): N/5 — [key finding]
Weakest section: [name]
Priority fixes:
1. [Hero fix]
2. [Value-prop fix]
3. [Weakest-section fix]Gates
- Below page-type threshold → BLOCK. Operator fixes and re-runs.
- "Just approve it" requests → reject. Re-run is an independent read.
- Hero score of 1 on any dimension → automatic BLOCK.
Composes with
- LP ship workflow (CRO gate, after voice enforce, before synth-audience).
- Preflight composite gate.
- Synthetic-audience panel (buyer-reaction test runs after CRO passes).
Common failure modes
- Single conversion-rate number with no section attribution.
- Auditor approves the page out of timeline pressure.
- Hero "looks fine" but fails the 5-second test (B2B homepages must communicate use case, alternative, and result in five seconds).
- Social proof segregated to a single block instead of interleaved (Pitch a vision as pain → solution → proof, interleaved per beat, not three sequential acts).
- Generic "Submit" or "Learn more" CTAs.
- Form fields beyond what the conversion event requires.
- Friction missing where it would help users self-qualify (Add friction when it helps users decide whether the product is for them).