How to Audit Delivered Backlinks Before Renewing a Package

26. September 2026

A delivery spreadsheet can make a link-building package look complete before you have checked a single placement. Before renewing, open the source pages, inspect the links and compare what is live with what you agreed to buy. A useful backlink audit establishes both whether the supplier delivered and whether another month deserves your budget.

You can start with a browser and a spreadsheet. For a small package, checking every placement manually is usually manageable.

Start with the agreed deliverables

Collect the original proposal, approved destinations, anchor instructions and replacement terms. Use these to build your audit sheet.

Item	What to record
Source	Exact page URL and referring domain
Destination	Agreed target URL and actual final destination
Anchor	Agreed wording and published wording
Link attributes	Values such as `nofollow`, `sponsored` or `ugc`
Placement	Article body, author biography, resource list or another location
Quality requirements	Agreed topic, language, market and metric thresholds
Timing and protection	Delivery date, retention period and replacement deadline

Add an audit date, evidence and a status: accepted, fix required, pending verification or outside the agreed brief.

Count source pages and referring domains separately. Ten placements across two websites represent two referring domains. Whether that fulfils the package depends on the agreement.

Keep contractual failures separate from preferences you developed later. You can decide a placement offers poor renewal value even when it technically meets the original brief.

Open every live source page

To verify backlink delivery, visit the exact submitted URL without logging into the publisher’s website. Confirm that the article loads and that your link is visible.

Watch for:

Missing pages, error messages or redirects to unrelated content.
Articles accessible only through a preview or account.
Your brand mentioned without a clickable link.
Links hidden in collapsed, obscure or unrelated sections.
Several reported URLs resolving to the same article.

Save a dated screenshot showing the surrounding paragraph. For technical discrepancies, also save the relevant HTML. A supplier’s publication screenshot does not establish that the link remains live today.

Separate availability from indexing

A page loading successfully does not establish that it is indexed.

Check for obvious indexing obstacles, including a noindex instruction in page metadata or HTTP headers. Note any canonical tag pointing elsewhere: it signals a preferred URL and deserves investigation, although it does not prove which URL Google selected.

For a third-party publisher, you generally cannot inspect its URLs through your own Search Console property. Ask the publisher for evidence if indexing was an explicit deliverable. Finding the page in search provides evidence of visibility; failing to find it with a search query is inconclusive.

Likewise, a backlink tool may discover a placement late. Record “not yet detected” separately from “link missing”.

Check the destination and anchor text

Click each backlink and record where it actually takes you.

Compare the final destination with the approved URL, checking the path, language and country version. A link intended for a UK comparison page might accidentally lead to the homepage, an outdated article or a version serving another market.

Inspect redirects as well. A legitimate redirect may work perfectly, but an unexplained tracking intermediary or unrelated destination needs clarification. Confirm that the final page loads and fulfils the promise made by the anchor.

Next, compare the visible anchor text with the agreed wording. If you approved a branded mention, a heavily commercial keyword phrase is a delivery discrepancy.

Read the whole sentence. The anchor should describe the destination naturally and help readers understand why they might click. Avoid requesting repetitive keyword anchors simply to make the package appear more SEO-focused.

Inspect the link attributes

Right-click the link and choose Inspect in your browser. Locate the anchor element and check its href destination and rel values.

The main values to recognise are:

sponsored: identifies advertising, sponsorship or compensated placement.
ugc: identifies user-generated content, such as forum contributions.
nofollow: qualifies the relationship between the publisher and the linked page.

These link relationship attributes describe how a link is qualified. “Dofollow” is an industry label; ordinary links do not require a special dofollow attribute.

Compare the implementation with the proposal, while checking that the proposal itself is appropriate. Google requires paid placements to be qualified with sponsored or nofollow, with sponsored preferred. A promise of paid links that pass ranking credit deserves scrutiny.

Paying an agency for outreach does not, by itself, establish that every resulting publisher placement was paid. Ask how placements were obtained.

An appropriately qualified link can still bring relevant visitors. Record that value without assuming guaranteed ranking benefits.

Read the placement in context

Technical delivery is only part of a link-building package review. Read enough of the article to assess whether the recommendation makes sense.

Ask whether the page addresses a real audience need, whether the surrounding paragraph supports your destination and whether readers can reasonably encounter the link. Check whether the publisher links to the article from relevant categories or other pages.

Review the wider website too. Large amounts of unrelated commercial content, broken navigation and repeated awkward insertions are reasons to investigate. A single observation rarely establishes the whole picture.

For affiliate sites targeting the UK, Europe or the Gulf, assess audience fit beyond the domain extension:

Does the language suit your intended readers?
Does the subject match their needs and buying context?
Can those readers use the products or services your destination discusses?
Do any supplied traffic estimates cover the relevant countries?

An English-language publication may reach readers across several markets. Request evidence rather than assuming its audience from its branding.

Treat Domain Rating as supporting context. DR is a third-party metric measured at domain level; inspect the actual source page and placement before accepting a high score as evidence of quality.

Calculate cost using accepted delivery

Use verified placements when comparing package costs.

Cost per accepted placement = package spend after refunds ÷ accepted placements

For example, a £300 package reporting ten placements appears to cost £30 each. If six pass your agreed acceptance criteria and four remain unresolved, the current cost is £50 per accepted placement.

Update the calculation after replacements or refunds. Use the same acceptance rules when comparing suppliers, and record distinct referring domains alongside placement counts.

Then review useful outcomes:

Referral visits and meaningful engagement.
Affiliate outbound clicks or attributable conversions, where measurable.
Search impressions and clicks for the destination pages.
Visibility for relevant queries in the intended countries.
Link retention at subsequent checks.

Compare consistent periods and note other changes, including content updates, seasonality and technical fixes. Search growth following delivery does not establish that the package caused it.

Recent placements may have little outcome data. Set another review date rather than treating either early silence or a brief ranking increase as a final verdict.

Use a renewal checklist

Before approving the next package, confirm that:

Every reported placement has been checked and dated.
Source pages, destinations and anchors match the agreed brief.
Link attributes have been inspected and paid placements are appropriately qualified.
Placement context suits the topic, language and target audience.
Duplicate URLs and repeat referring domains are counted accurately.
Missing links and discrepancies have documented remedies and deadlines.
Costs reflect accepted delivery and any refunds.
Available outcome data has been reviewed with attribution limits acknowledged.
The next package has clear acceptance and replacement terms.

Renew when verified delivery, relevant placements and the available outcomes justify further spending. Where evidence is incomplete, consider a smaller batch with a defined review date. If material failures remain unresolved, settle those before committing another month’s budget.