Backlink audit with a disavow file only if warranted

Most of these audits end with us recommending no disavow file at all. Google's own documentation restricts the tool to sites carrying a manual action or with a well-founded reason to expect one, and since the December 2022 link spam update the system has largely ignored paid links rather than acting against the site receiving them. We write a file in three situations: there is a manual action in Search Console, an inherited paid footprint is documented and still traceable, or the company is being sold and the buyer's technical due diligence will find what a previous agency bought. What gets read: The Search Console links export, which tops out at 1,000 linking sites and is therefore never the whole picture, reconciled against Ahrefs and Majestic. The manual actions and security issues reports. Wayback snapshots of your own site during the years in question. And, if you still have them, invoices and reports from previous agencies, which are the single most useful document in this work and the one clients most often assume is irrelevant. The Czech mid-market has a specific history: Katalogy odkazů from roughly 2009 to 2014, article directories with spun Czech text, and paid placements on regional news portals that no longer disclose. The most common thing we find in Czech groups is not bought links at all: it is a footer link block connecting six brands under the same owner, present on every page of every property, built by somebody's developer in 2016 and never questioned. That is the finding worth acting on, and it is fixed by editing your own templates rather than by filing anything with Google. Four piles, one decision each: Keep. Remove at source, with the request drafted for you in Czech or English, because Czech directory operators comply more often than people expect when asked properly. Ignore, which is nearly always the largest pile and includes almost every hacked-WordPress pharma and casino anchor pointing at you. Disavow, which is the shortest pile and often empty. What we refuse to do: Generate a file from a tool's toxicity score. No tool knows which links Google counts, and disavowing a domain because software coloured it red removes links that were doing work for you. If your brief is to disavow everything below a rating threshold, decline us and buy that from someone who will run the export. We also refuse to sell this as a monthly service. It is an annual reading at most, and more usefully a reading taken after an acquisition, an agency change, or a ranking drop you have already ruled out as content-driven. Not for you if: Your traffic fell during a core update, your content team knows why, and you want links to be the explanation instead. We will run the audit and tell you the links are not the cause, and you will have paid for an answer you did not want. Have that conversation with us before you buy. What you receive: A memo written to be read by somebody who is not an SEO, because in the cases where this matters the reader is a CFO, a board, or an acquirer's advisor. It states plainly what was bought, by whom, when, whether it is still visible, and what the exposure is. Then the per-domain classification with reasoning. Then drafted removal requests in Czech and English. Then, only where warranted, the disavow file itself, with a note on each line explaining why it is there, so the next person to look at your account in three years understands what you did. Where a manual action exists, a drafted reconsideration request that describes the cleanup honestly, because the ones that get accepted are the ones that admit what happened.