Webflow SEO, done by people who work in Webflow

What Webflow gets wrong by default

Webflow is a genuinely capable SEO platform. The problem is that its defaults are built for launching a site, not for ranking one, and a designer-built project almost always ships with the same handful of gaps.

• Collection metadata left untemplated. Every CMS item inherits an identical title and description, so a 200-item blog competes with itself on one duplicated snippet.
• Orphaned CMS pages. Items are reachable through a Collection List on one page and nowhere else, which puts them several clicks deep with almost no internal link equity.
• No structured data. Webflow has no plugin ecosystem, so schema requires hand-written embeds — and consequently it usually does not exist at all.
• Asset weight. Uncompressed hero images, four font weights loaded for two, and Lottie files on pages that did not need animation.
• Redirect debt. Slugs edited in the CMS quietly break every URL that pointed at them, and Webflow does not create the redirect for you.
• Subdomain staging left indexable on .webflow.io, competing with production.

How we work

We audit first and give you the ranked list before you commit to implementation. Most of it is template-level: fix the Collection template once and 200 pages are corrected at the same time, which is why Webflow work tends to be cheaper per page than the equivalent on WordPress.

Implementation happens in your project with a Designer seat, or as a written change list for your own team. Either way you get the reasoning, not just the change, so the next person does not undo it.

Where Webflow genuinely limits you

We will be straight about the ceiling. No server log access, no server-side redirects with complex logic, Collection item limits that bite on large catalogues, and less control over rendering than a custom stack. If you are hitting those, the honest answer is a migration — and we would rather scope that than sell you optimisation work that cannot clear the constraint.