I learned that a valid XML sitemap can still be wrong
While working on SEO audits, I noticed that XML validation answers only one question: is the sitemap formatted correctly?
A technically valid sitemap can still contain:
- redirected URLs
- 404 pages
- non-canonical URLs
- pages blocked from indexing
- inaccurate lastmod dates
That distinction changed how I audit sites. I now treat XML validation as the first check, not the final verdict.
I turned that workflow into a free XML sitemap checker so site owners can review the URLs inside a sitemap instead of trusting the green “valid” message alone.
For anyone building SEO tools: which sitemap issue has been the most common on the sites you audit?
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
How did you decide this was worth building in the first place?
Curious how long it took before you saw the first real results?
Curious how long it took before you saw the first real results?
Curious how long it took before you saw the first real results?
How did you decide this was worth building in the first place?
Good point. Did you test that with users before committing to it?