I built an AI that finds "Trust Leaks" in 30 seconds.
After 15+ manual roasts, the patterns are clear: Founders hide behind jargon, and it's killing conversions.
I automated the process. My AI scores your site 1-10 based on "Trust Leaks."
The results: Most sites are "Dead on Arrival" (below 4/10).
Doing 5 free audits for the IH community right now. Drop your URL!
Full 10-point Blueprint: https://roastmylanding.vercel.app/
Code: TRUSTLEAK50
Trending on Indie Hackers
I'm not sure if you're looking for feedback or offering your service to this channel but here are some thoughts on the landing page (sorry, some of it is blunt):
RoastMyLanding has already been done many times (https://www.roastmylandingpage.com/) so the angle is dry. Trust Leaks is more interesting but there are some other concerns.
"Your Landing Page Sucks. Fix It Now." - I get that you were going for edgy and maybe shock factor but it's going to put people on the defensive. It also isn't working because, for most visitors, you haven't seen their landing page yet, so it's a bold unsubstantiated claim right off the bat. The only way to make that work is to turn it into a "dare". Dare the user to let you prove it by doing a review of their landing page. Get them to put in their URL, analyze it, show them 1-2 problems with their page and ask them to buy the full analysis.
"Get an AI-powered design audit in 30 seconds." - This doesn't entice me to pay for this at all. AI tools are already a dime a dozen. I don't want to pay for AI to do this. I want the results of an analysis. To be honest - telling people it's AI might be an objection. You even have it in your FAQ - "Is this just ChatGPT with a UI?". People will think so. Especially because your hero image is AI generated. Also, the 42/100 in the hero image seems to be a different scoring system because later you talk about a 10point system.
Your copy is tech-heavy, bordering on jargon:
"Simply drop your landing page URL into our engine. We handle the heavy lifting of crawling and analyzing your visual hierarchy." - Engine, crawling, visual hierarchy - people trying to increase conversions don't care about that. They care about the feedback that will get them more money or conversions.
"10 TECHNICAL VECTORS OF CONVERSION" - Again, jargony. Vectors of conversion?
The Comprehensive Audit section leaves it up to the reader to figure out what the bullet points are for. Also, it says a 10 point audit but there are only 9 bullet points.
This line talks about a design audit but the rest of the copy talks about the 10 point proprietary analysis - 'Get an AI-powered design audit in 30 seconds". The true product is a little fuzzy.
Let me ask - how is this different from a custom GPT tool? How sure are you that this can't be knocked off?
I pivoted. I removed the 'sucks' headline, fixed the jargon, and tightened the 10-point audit. Thanks for the wake-up call.
Trust leaks” is a strong angle — way more memorable than generic CRO language.
One thing though — if this works, people will refer it by name. That’s where most tools quietly lose momentum.
Right now I’m guessing the branding is still secondary?
If you want this to spread (especially via word-of-mouth), the name has to carry that same sharpness as “trust leaks”.
Are you planning to build this into a proper product or keep it as a quick tool?
Spot on again, Aryan. 🎯
"RoastMyLanding" was the hook to get people in the door, but the vision is definitely a proper product centered around The Trust Audit. >
I’m currently seeing that "Trust Leaks" is the language that actually makes founders pull out their wallets. I'm 100% planning to build this out—likely pivoting the branding to lead with the "Trust" outcome once the engine is fully refined.
You mentioned "sharp" names earlier—I'm all ears on how to bridge that gap without losing the initial 'spiciness.' What’s your take?
Yeah — you don’t want to lose the edge, that’s the whole advantage here.
I’d think of it as keeping “Trust Leaks” as the core concept, and building a name that feels just as sharp but a bit more ownable.
Something that still hints at:
→ exposing issues
→ credibility / trust
→ not sounding like a generic audit tool
“RoastMyLanding” pulls people in, but long-term people won’t refer serious tools that way.
The sweet spot is where it still feels punchy, but also something founders are comfortable saying out loud or recommending.
Do you see this staying more on the “roast” side, or moving toward a more serious / authority positioning?
That’s the million-dollar question. Right now, I see the 'Roast' as the Trojan Horse. It’s the viral hook that gets me through the door because everyone loves a spicy take.
But you’re right—long-term, the name has to evolve into something that carries the authority of a 'Security Audit' for marketing.
I’m leaning toward moving to the 'Authority' side while keeping the spicy delivery. Like a consultant who doesn’t wear a tie but always finds the bug. Any names popping into your head that bridge that gap between 'Punchy' and 'Credible'?
Yeah that framing makes sense — roast gets attention, but authority is what people trust and pay for.
I’d anchor it around that “audit” feel, but keep a bit of edge in how it sounds.
Something in the direction of:
names that imply detection or exposure
names that feel like a system, not a gimmick
still short and easy to say
The key is it should feel like something a founder would actually recommend without explaining it.
Happy to share a few directions if you want to explore that properly — just don’t want to throw random names without aligning on the tone first.