Internal Link Anchor Text Analyzer
“Click here” tells a search engine nothing and a screen reader user less. This finds all of them.
View the page source in your browser (Ctrl+U or ⌘+U) and paste the whole thing. Nothing is uploaded.
Problems found
All links
| Anchor text | Destination | Type | Assessment |
|---|
Most-used anchor text
What the internal Link Anchor Text Analyzer does
Anchor text is the visible, clickable text of a link. It does two jobs: it tells a reader where the link goes, and it tells a search engine what the destination page is about. “Click here” does neither.
This analyser extracts every link on a page and assesses its anchor text. It flags generic phrases
from a list of the usual offenders, links whose text is just a URL, anchors over ninety characters,
and — most seriously — links with no accessible text at all. That last case is common:
an icon link or an image link with no alt text and no aria-label is announced by a screen
reader as the raw URL, character by character. The tool checks text content, image alt text and
aria-label together, since any of the three provides an accessible name.
Internal and external links are separated using the domain you supply, which lets you see the
balance. It also checks that external links opening in a new tab carry
rel="noopener" — modern browsers imply it, but declaring it is still good
practice.
The frequency list at the bottom surfaces over-optimisation. Repeating the same keyword-rich anchor across dozens of internal links used to be a tactic and is now a pattern search engines recognise. The tool also flags the reverse problem: the same anchor text pointing at several different URLs on one page, which is genuinely confusing for a reader deciding which link to follow.
How to use it
- Paste your page HTML and enter your domain so internal and external links can be separated.
- Fix red items first — empty anchors and links without an href are accessibility failures.
- Rewrite generic anchors to describe the destination.
- Check the frequency list for a single anchor repeated too often, or one anchor pointing at several places.
A worked example
Four links from the same page:
| Anchor text | Assessment |
|---|---|
click here | Generic — describes nothing |
https://example.com/method | URL as anchor text — unreadable when announced aloud |
| (empty) | Empty anchor — a screen reader reads out the URL |
how we test running shoes | Descriptive — tells reader and crawler the same thing |
The rewrite is usually mechanical. Read our click here page for the full method becomes Read how we test running shoes for the full method. The sentence is shorter, the link is self-describing, and someone tabbing through links with a screen reader now hears something useful instead of “click here” four times.
Frequently asked questions
Is “click here” actually harmful?
It is not penalised, but it wastes the strongest signal you can give about a destination page, and it is genuinely unhelpful for screen-reader users, who often navigate by pulling up a list of all links on a page. A list of twelve entries reading “click here” is useless.
Should every internal link use my target keyword?
No. Repeating one keyword-rich anchor across dozens of links is a recognised over-optimisation pattern. Vary the phrasing naturally — different sentences link to the same page for different reasons, and the anchor should reflect the reason.
How many links should a page have?
There is no limit worth worrying about; Google dropped its old “100 links” guidance long ago. Judge by whether each link helps a reader. A page with 200 navigational links and 3 contextual ones has a structural problem, not a numeric one.
Do I still need rel="noopener" on target="_blank" links?
Modern browsers apply it implicitly, so the original security issue is largely handled. Adding it explicitly costs nothing, protects users on older browsers, and is still what most audits expect to see.