Reports & White-Label

Full Rank Report

Export every keyword and every grid point into one document for clients or the record.

Included on every plan No card required to start No add-ons or separate subscriptions
$5.33Per location / month
42Tools included
0Feature tiers
112131127121
Full Rank ReportPDF export
Quick answer

A full rank report is the complete per-point record behind a summary — every sample point, keyword and timestamp — which is what you produce when somebody disputes the headline figure.

Overview

What it does

Summaries are useful right up until somebody disagrees with one. At that point the average position, the tidy chart and the confident sentence are all worth nothing, because none of them can be examined. What settles the disagreement is the underlying record: which coordinates were queried, for which terms, on which date, and what came back from each.

This situation arises more often than it sounds. A client whose own search shows something different. A prospect who suspects the audit was generous. An internal argument about whether a change worked. In each case the question is the same — where did that number come from — and a summary has no answer to it.

A full record answers it by being reproducible. Someone else can take the coordinates and the dates, run the same query, and land somewhere close. That property is what separates a measurement from a claim, and it is the reason the raw output is worth keeping even when nobody is currently asking for it.

It has a second use that is less obvious. Summaries compress, and compression discards the very things worth acting on — a single district that is red while its neighbours are fine, one keyword behaving unlike the rest. Those are visible in the record and invisible in the average.

Features

Everything Full Rank Report gives you

1

Every sample point retained

Each coordinate’s result kept rather than reduced to an average.

2

Timestamps throughout

When each query ran, which is what makes the record reproducible.

3

Frame described

Grid geometry, spacing and keyword set stated alongside the data.

4

Per-keyword breakdown

Each term separately, since averaging terms hides the one that moved.

5

Machine-readable export

A format someone can actually re-run analysis on rather than a picture.

6

Visual and tabular together

The map for reading, the table for checking.

7

Historical records preserved

Prior reports kept intact rather than overwritten by the latest run.

8

Competitor records alongside

The same frame run for rivals, retained the same way.

9

White-label output

Your branding, with the method still stated.

How it works

From setup to first result

  1. 1

    Record the frame with the data

    Geometry, spacing, keywords and cadence, stored alongside the results.

  2. 2

    Keep every point

    Averages can be recomputed from points; points cannot be recovered from averages.

  3. 3

    Timestamp each query

    A result with no time attached cannot be reproduced or defended.

  4. 4

    Break out by keyword

    A blended figure conceals the term that is actually moving.

  5. 5

    Export in a usable format

    A screenshot is not a record, whatever it appears to show.

  6. 6

    Preserve prior runs

    Overwriting history removes the comparison the record exists to support.

  7. 7

    Produce it when challenged

    This is the document that ends the disagreement, so it needs to exist before one starts.

Why it matters

What changes with Full Rank Report

Without it
  • Keeping only the summary
  • Discarding per-point data
  • Storing screenshots as records
  • Overwriting previous runs
  • Reporting a competitor position with no record
With Full Rank Report
  • Summaries cannot be examined
  • Reproducibility is the standard
  • Compression discards the actionable part
  • Disputes are routine
  • Overwritten history cannot be compared

Summaries cannot be examined

The moment a figure is disputed, only the underlying record can settle it.

Reproducibility is the standard

If someone else can re-run the query and land close, the number is a measurement rather than an assertion.

Compression discards the actionable part

A single red district or one anomalous keyword disappears into an average.

Disputes are routine

Clients search for themselves and see something different. That conversation is easier with a record than without one.

Overwritten history cannot be compared

Keeping only the latest run removes the entire basis for showing change.

Competitor records need the same treatment

A rival’s position claimed without a record is exactly as weak as your own would be.

What it measures

  • Sample points recorded
  • Keywords covered
  • Runs retained in history
  • Records with a stated frame
  • Exports produced
  • Disputes resolved from the record
Benefits

What you get out of it

Disputes settled

A record, not an assertion.

Reproducible figures

Frame and timestamps kept.

Anomalies visible

Points, not averages.

Comparable history

Prior runs preserved.

Usable exports

Data, not screenshots.

Defensible competitor claims

Same standard applied.

Reports & outputs

What Full Rank Report produces

Every output is exportable and white-label, with your branding and none of ours.

Output

Per-point results

Every coordinate’s outcome.

Output

Method record

Frame, spacing, keywords, cadence.

Output

Timestamps

When each query ran.

Output

Per-keyword tables

Each term on its own.

Output

Machine-readable export

Re-analysable, not an image.

Output

Archived prior runs

History kept intact.

Built for

Who uses Full Rank Report

Agencies

Send branded reports on a schedule and stop assembling decks by hand.

Multi-location brands

Give leadership the rollup and operators their own detail from one report.

Franchises

Report per franchisee and across the network without duplicating work.

Independent owners

See plainly whether the last three months moved anything.

Best practices

Get more out of it

  • Store the frame with the data. A result without its method cannot be reproduced by anyone, including you.
  • Keep every sample point. Averages can be rebuilt from points and points cannot be rebuilt from averages.
  • Timestamp everything, because reproducibility depends on knowing when the query ran.
  • Break results out by keyword rather than blending, since blending hides the term that moved.
  • Export something machine-readable. A screenshot looks like a record and cannot function as one.
  • Preserve prior runs. Overwriting them removes the comparison the whole exercise exists to support.
Common mistakes

Keeping only the summary

It is sufficient until it is questioned, at which point there is nothing behind it.

Discarding per-point data

The anomalies worth acting on live in the points and vanish in the average.

Storing screenshots as records

They cannot be re-analysed, re-sorted or checked, which is most of what a record is for.

Overwriting previous runs

The history is the comparison. Removing it leaves a current figure with nothing to compare against.

Reporting a competitor position with no record

It is the weakest claim in most reports and the easiest one to be challenged on.

Comparison

Manually vs with Full Rank Report

Doing it manuallyWith Full Rank Report
A summary figureThe full per-point record
Method unrecordedFrame stored with the data
Keywords blendedEach keyword separately
Screenshots keptMachine-readable exports
Latest run onlyPrior runs preserved
Competitor claims assertedCompetitor records held to the same standard
Getting started
  • Store the frame alongside every run
  • Retain all sample points
  • Timestamp each query
  • Break results out per keyword
  • Export in a re-analysable format
  • Archive prior runs rather than overwriting
  • Keep competitor records to the same standard
Comparison

Others vs Local Rank Checker

How the usual pricing and packaging in this category compares with ours.

Feature
Other tools
Local Rank Checker
Every keyword exported
Selected subset
Complete
All grid points included
Summary only
Full data
Before and after grids
Single snapshot
Compared
Embedded heat maps
Position tables
Visuals
White-label
Platform branded
Yours
Archival record
Every tool on every plan
Features held back for a higher tier
Common
None
Pricing model
Tiered plans
Per location
Per-seat charges
Usually
Never
Minimum contract
Often annual
Monthly
Setup fee
Sometimes
None
White-label reporting
Paid add-on
Included
Try before an account

“Other tools” describes the common pattern across the category, not any one named product.

Pricing

Full Rank Report is included on every plan

One flat price per location covers all 42 tools. There is no higher tier, no add-on, and no per-seat charge.

  • All 42 tools on every plan
  • No per-seat charges
  • No setup fee and no contract
  • Cancel or change locations any time
Complete plan
$5.33
per location / month
Start free trial

See the full breakdown on pricing.

FAQ

Full Rank Report questions

What is a full rank report for?

It is the record behind the summary — every sample point, keyword and timestamp — produced when the headline figure is questioned.

Why not just keep the average?

Because an average cannot be examined. When somebody disputes it there is nothing underneath to look at.

What makes a measurement reproducible?

A stated frame and timestamps. With both, someone else can re-run the query and land close, which is what makes it a measurement.

Why keep every sample point?

Averages can be recomputed from points; points cannot be recovered from an average. The anomalies live in the points.

Are screenshots adequate as records?

No. They cannot be re-sorted, re-analysed or checked, which is most of what a record is for.

How long should records be kept?

As long as you might need to demonstrate change — normally years, since the comparison is the value.

Why break out by keyword?

Because terms move independently, and a blended figure conceals the one that is actually doing something.

Should competitor data be recorded the same way?

Yes. A competitor position asserted without a record is the weakest claim in most reports.

What happens if the frame changed between runs?

The comparison is invalid and the record should say so. This is precisely why the frame is stored with the data.

Who actually reads a full report?

Almost nobody, until there is a disagreement. It exists for that moment, which is why it must predate it.

Can it be white-labelled?

Yes, and it should still state the method. Branding does not replace provenance.

Does the client get this or the summary?

The summary routinely, this on request. Offering it changes how the summary is received even when nobody asks.

What if a client’s own search disagrees?

Their search is personalised and taken from one point. The record shows unpersonalised results from defined coordinates, which is the more honest measure.

Can the export be analysed elsewhere?

Yes, that is the point of a machine-readable format. A record you cannot re-analyse is a picture.

How large do these get?

Substantial at estate scale, which is a storage question rather than a reason to discard the underlying data.

Should every run be archived?

Yes. The cost of storage is trivial against the cost of not being able to show a comparison.

Does this replace the trend report?

No. The trend report reads direction; this is the evidence underneath any point on it.

What is the most common gap?

No stored frame. The data exists, nobody wrote down how it was produced, and it can no longer be reproduced.

How does this help internally?

It settles arguments about whether a change worked, using data rather than recollection.

What single practice matters most?

Storing the method with the results. Everything else about the record depends on that one habit.

Every tool. One price. No add-ons.

$5.33 per location per month gets you Full Rank Report and the other 41 tools.