Pinpoint template-driven duplication to boost crawl budget, strengthen relevance signals, and elevate sitewide ranking efficiency by tracking Template Uniqueness Score.
Template Uniqueness Score quantifies the ratio of unique, indexable content to boilerplate within pages that share a template, revealing how much duplicate structure might be dampening relevance signals and crawl efficiency. SEO teams track it during audits, migrations, or large-scale template rollouts to pinpoint layouts that need richer copy, modular schema, or dynamic elements—actions that prevent thin-content issues and unlock higher page-level rankings.
Template Uniqueness Score (TUS) measures the percentage of indexable, non-boilerplate HTML (copy, images, structured data) across all pages sharing a template. A TUS of 65 % means 35 % of every page is duplicated chrome (nav, footer, widgets). Enterprise SEO teams track the metric during migrations, CMS rollouts, and redesigns to ensure templates supply enough differentiated signals to earn individual rankings instead of being grouped as “near duplicates.”
Global Marketplace (120 k product pages): lifting TUS from 38 % to 72 % via AI-generated comparison blocks cut duplicate-content notices in GSC by 71 % and boosted non-brand clicks 19 % in eight weeks.
SaaS Knowledge Hub (8 k articles): swapping generic sidebars for topic-specific CTAs raised TUS to 80 %; impression share for secondary keywords grew 24 % and Average Position improved 1.6 spots.
A 15% score signals that Google may view many pages as near-duplicates, diluting crawl budget and reducing the chance that unique product information gets indexed. Priority fixes: (1) Increase unique content above the fold—expand product descriptions, FAQs, or UGC blocks so the unique portion exceeds ~30-40%. (2) Trim boilerplate by loading reviews widgets or similar elements via deferred JS or replacing bulky navigation with more compact markup to reduce template weight.
Duplicate-content checks flag identical or near-identical URL collections, often using canonical tags to consolidate ranking signals. Template Uniqueness Score instead measures the ratio of boilerplate template code to unique article content on each page. On a news site, every article has a unique URL and headline, so duplicate-content tools may show no problems, yet a low template score (e.g., 20%) still indicates that most HTML is repeated. Search engines might weigh pages lower if the unique signal is buried under heavy boilerplate, so improving the score can raise perceived content value even when canonicalisation is correct.
Template Uniqueness Score = unique words ÷ total words. • Category: 600 ÷ 3,200 ≈ 18.8% • Product: 500 ÷ 2,000 = 25% • Blog: 1,800 ÷ 2,500 = 72% The category template has the lowest score (~19%) and should be refactored first—either by adding richer category descriptions, dynamic filters, or by slimming navigation and repetitive elements.
With <10% unique content, Google may decide the pages add no distinct value beyond existing indexed URLs and classify them as Soft 404s. To justify a redesign: (1) Crawl-depth vs. traffic chart showing that low-score pages consume crawl budget but drive negligible organic visits. (2) Correlation analysis demonstrating pages with >30% uniqueness have 3-4× more impressions and clicks. These metrics quantify the opportunity cost and potential uplift from improving uniqueness.
✅ Better approach: Segment the page into template vs. body sections with crawl tools (e.g., Screaming Frog custom extraction). Optimize only repetitive modules that matter to Google—such as H1 patterns, meta tags, and above-the-fold text—while leaving shared navigation and footer code intact.
✅ Better approach: Increase genuine uniqueness through modular content—location-specific CTAs, schema properties that vary by entity, and dynamic internal links—keeping code lean and user-visible. Monitor Core Web Vitals after changes to ensure no performance regression.
✅ Better approach: Correlate template uniqueness metrics with indexation, crawl frequency, and organic traffic in GSC. Set data-driven thresholds per template type; iterate only when duplicate URLs show cannibalization or poor ranking, not because a tool flashes red.
✅ Better approach: Add automated template diff checks to the deployment pipeline. Trigger alerts when shared component changes push duplication above predefined limits, allowing rollback or hotfix before search engines recrawl.
Pinpoint template overexposure, rebalance crawl budget, and unlock untapped intent …
Purge programmatic index bloat to reclaim crawl budget, consolidate link …
Expose template-level cannibalization, streamline consolidation decisions, and recapture double-digit CTR …
Secure double-digit lifts in high-intent sessions and revenue by operationalising …
Eliminate index budget dilution to reclaim crawl equity, cut time-to-index …
Mitigate template saturation, recover wasted crawl budget, and lift revenue-page …
Get expert SEO insights and automated optimizations with our platform.
Start Free Trial