Free tool Editorial content

TF Gap Analysis

Provide your URL + up to 5 competitor URLs. The tool surfaces terms everyone uses except you, and conversely your unique terms. Semantic diagnostic before rewriting.

Your URL

Competitor URLs (1 per line, max 5)

Missing terms
—
waiting
0
Your words
0
Comp fetched

Also worth exploring

All tools
Readability Analyzer Measure your English text readability: Flesch Reading Ease, Gunning Fog, long sentences, lexical diversity, complex words. Calibrate tone to your audience. Bulk Meta Extractor Extract title, meta description, H1 and H2 from up to 50 pages at once. Ideal for auditing the editorial consistency of a category or a competitor. A/B Test SEO Calculator Measure whether the gap between two variants (titles, layouts, snippets) is statistically significant. Two-proportion Z-test with p-value and confidence interval. Page E-A-T Profile E-A-T score based on objective signals: identified author, published and modified dates, citations to authority sources, Article+Person Schema.org markup.

Frequently asked questions

What does this tool measure exactly?

It fetches your URL + up to 5 competitor URLs you provide. It tokenizes each page (lowercase, stop words removed, accents folded), computes the frequency of each term and surfaces gaps: words used by at least 2 competitors but absent or under-represented on your page. It's TF (term frequency) analysis on a small corpus — not a true SERP-wide TF-IDF.

Why not auto-fetch the SERP top 10?

Fetching the SERP per user query would cost ~$0.10 per call (CrazySerp, ValueSERP…) and a free public tool would be abused within hours. By asking you to provide the competitor URLs, we keep the tool 100% free, and you keep control of which competitors you actually want to beat (often ≠ SERP top 10).

How do I pick good competitors?

For each KW you want to rank for, search it on Google and copy the URLs from positions 1-5. Avoid big-site homepages (Amazon, Wikipedia) that aren't comparable. Prefer editorial articles or category pages on the same intent. 3-5 competitors are enough — more doesn't increase analysis quality.

What next — do I add the missing words to my article?

Not brutally. TF gap surfaces semantic entities competitors cover and you don't. Read the words — some are relevant (integrate naturally in the body), others aren't (a competitor covering a sub-topic out of scope). No stuffing: 5-10 new terms integrated as prose are enough to signal semantic coverage to Google.

Closing the gap fills semantics — what about authority?

Adding the right terms improves marginal ranking. To really win, you also need external authority — targeted editorial backlinks from the Nautilinks network.

See the network All tools