Case studies / Public scorecards / ApexHierarchy

Public scorecard — unsolicited

This scorecard was produced independently as a methodology example, from the public apexhierarchy.com launch on Hacker News. ClawniLab is not affiliated with ApexHierarchy and no customer relationship exists. Findings are illustrative of our 10-point clarity methodology and do not constitute professional advice for the reviewed party.

CSPublic scorecard

ApexHierarchy — landing page clarity scorecard.

Scored from ApexHierarchy's Show HN launch, straight off our public free score tool — same 10-point grid as a paid audit, no contact with the founder.

Site reviewed: apexhierarchy.com Scored: 2026-09-30 Method: 10-point clarity grid Source: HN launch →

39/100 Fast and information-dense, but the page never says who it's for or what a visitor walks away with — only a description of what the product measures.

01Friction map

Three things to fix first

Ranked the same way every paid audit ranks issues — by what a stranger notices first.

Promise — 0/10

"ApexHierarchy — from Town to Shadow Index, a power index, not a rumor mill." Describes the product, not what the visitor gets from using it — no number, time or artefact.

Fix: State one concrete outcome in the sub-headline, e.g. "Check any public figure's tier and sourced net-worth estimate in seconds, backed by 1,616 citations."

Audience — 0/10

No "for X" statement anywhere on the page — not in the hero, the about section, or the pricing CTA.

Fix: Name one buyer in the hero ("for journalists, analysts and due-diligence researchers") and repeat it on the pricing link.

Proof — 0/10

"742 profiles ranked · 39 countries covered · 3,028 connections mapped · 1,616 cited sources" measure the dataset's size, not third-party validation of the product.

Fix: Add one named, checkable proof element next to the tagline — a press mention, a quoted researcher, or "cited in [named outlet]."

02Strongest point

What ApexHierarchy already gets right

10/10

Perceived speed

HTTP 200 in 0.22s, 50.8KB, no interstitial.

03Full scorecard

All 10 criteria

Same grid, scored 0–10 on every criterion, evidence quoted from the page.

#	Criterion	Score	Evidence
01	Hero clarity	5 / 10	H1 "Global Power Rankings" names the category; tagline "a power index, not a rumor mill" names neither audience nor outcome.
02	Promise	0 / 10	"Combines reach, influence, institutional power, financial strength, network position, and public visibility" — features, no stated outcome.
03	CTA	4 / 10	"See plans — from ₹499/month" competes visually with six other nav links (rankings, net worth, cities, institutions, indexes).
04	Proof	0 / 10	Only dataset-scope counts (742 profiles, 39 countries) — no named customer, quote, or third-party source.
05	Audience	0 / 10	No audience named anywhere on the page — not hero, about section, or CTA.
06	Objections	4 / 10	Price visible in nav ("from ₹499/month"); Terms, Privacy, Disclaimer and Complaints links exist only in the footer.
07	Readability	5 / 10	H2s "The APEX tier scale" plus unexplained coinages "Shadow Index" and "Apocalypse Index" require exploration, not a scan.
08	Perceived speed	10 / 10	HTTP 200 in 0.22s, 50.8KB, no interstitial. [VÉRIFIÉ — measured via curl]
09	Consistency	6 / 10	Pricing shown in Indian Rupees ("₹499/month") while the page ranks global entities (Elon Musk, SpaceX, TSMC) — a currency/audience mismatch.
10	Next step	5 / 10	CTA leads to /pricing (clear destination), but no copy next to it states what a subscriber actually receives.
	Total clarity score	39 / 100	Well below the 70 threshold — a first-time visitor can't tell who this is for or what they get.

Want your page scored like this?

Free instant score, or a full clarity audit with friction map and hero rewrite in 48 hours.

Get my free score → Full audit — $149 → Quick report — $49 →