Overview
JavaScript leads Accounting & Auditing's secondary barrier stack above the norm
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 93% |
| Antibot | 15% |
| CAPTCHA | 13% |
| JavaScript | 40% |
| Rate Limiting | 8% |
| TLS | 10% |
WAF at 93% is the dominant barrier. JavaScript (40%) leads secondary coverage. The remaining barriers sit materially lower, giving Accounting & Auditing a narrow but defined secondary layer.
Barrier Landscape
WAF leads Accounting & Auditing at 93% — JavaScript is the main secondary layer
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 93% |
| Antibot | 15% |
| CAPTCHA | 13% |
| JavaScript | 40% |
| Rate Limiting | 8% |
| TLS | 10% |
| Has robots.txt | 63% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 1% |
WAF dominates at 93%. JavaScript (40%) leads active secondary barriers, followed by Antibot (15%). The remaining three barriers all sit at or below 13% — a concentrated rather than broadly stacked profile.
Two-barrier stacks are Accounting & Auditing's most common security posture
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 5% |
| 1 barrier | 39% |
| 2 barriers | 41% |
| 3 barriers | 7% |
| 4 barriers | 3% |
| 5 barriers | 5% |
| 6 barriers | 0% |
41% of Accounting & Auditing sites carry exactly 2 barriers. 15% stack three or more. 5% carry none — a low share of unprotected sites for this sector.
Accounting & Auditing sites are predominantly Simple to access
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.31 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.31 and a median of Simple place Accounting & Auditing toward the easier end of the sectors surveyed. 75% of sites are Simple to access; 5% require Moderate or above.
Simple tier covers more than three-quarters of Accounting & Auditing sites
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 75% |
| 2 - Easy | 20% |
| 3 - Moderate | 4% |
| 4 - Complex | 1% |
| 5 - Advanced | 0% |
Simple (75%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 95% of sites, while 4% land at Moderate and 1% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Around two-thirds of Accounting & Auditing sites publish any robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 63% |
Only 63% of Accounting & Auditing sites have a valid robots.txt. Nearly 37% leave crawl policy undefined — one of the lower coverage rates across surveyed sectors.
Most Accounting & Auditing sites name one bot or none in their robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 46% |
| 1 | 43% |
| 2–4 | 7% |
| 5–9 | 1% |
| 10–15 | 2% |
| 16+ | 1% |
46% of Accounting & Auditing sites name zero agents and 43% name one. A mean of 1.2 is pulled up by a small number of sites with extensive policies, while the median stays at 1.
All bot categories receive minimal attention in Accounting & Auditing robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 3% |
| SEO / search indexing | 2% |
| SEO audit tools | 2% |
| Commercial scrapers | 2% |
| Social / content scrapers | 3% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 0% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 0% |
No bot category exceeds 3% mention rate across Accounting & Auditing sites. AI crawlers and Social / content scrapers lead at 3%, with all remaining categories at 2% or below.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Accounting & Auditing robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 37% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 15% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 9% |
| Mixed AI posture | 0% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 2% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 37%, with path-level mixed rules at 15%. Mixed AI posture (0%) and blanket Disallow (2%) are minimal.
magpie-crawler leads named Disallow rules in Accounting & Auditing robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 43% | 25% |
| GPTBot | 1% | 2% |
| PerplexityBot | 1% | 2% |
| Twitterbot | 0% | 3% |
| magpie-crawler | 2% | — |
| CCBot | 1% | 1% |
| ChatGPT-User | 1% | 1% |
| ClaudeBot | 1% | 1% |
| Google-Extended | 1% | 1% |
| OAI-SearchBot | 1% | 1% |
| anthropic-ai | 1% | 1% |
| Googlebot | 1% | 1% |
| Yandex | 1% | 1% |
| DatoCmsSearchBot | 1% | 1% |
| BlueJBot | 1% | — |
| AhrefsBot | 1% | — |
| MJ12bot | 1% | — |
| SMTBot | 1% | — |
| WeSEE | 1% | — |
| crystalsemanticsbot | 1% | — |
| proximic | 1% | — |
| Amazonbot | 1% | — |
| Applebot-Extended | 1% | — |
| AwarioRssBot | 1% | — |
| AwarioSmartBot | 1% | — |
Values are percentages of all 100 Accounting & Auditing sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 43% Disallow. Among named agents, magpie-crawler, GPTBot, PerplexityBot are the most frequently targeted — focused on non-AI crawlers.
Industry Cohort
Accounting & Auditing is the most accessible sub-category in the Financial Services cohort
| WAF | Antibot | CAPTCHA | JavaScript | Rate Limit | TLS | robots.txt | Blocks AI | Tier | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accounting & Auditing | 93% | 15% | 13% | 40% | 8% | 10% | 63% | 1% | Tier 1 |
| Banking | 86% | 19% | 10% | 36% | 12% | 11% | 72% | 4% | Tier 2 |
| Finance | 88% | 27% | 15% | 36% | 22% | 16% | 82% | 13% | Tier 2 |
| Insurance | 86% | 26% | 19% | 37% | 17% | 13% | 71% | 3% | Tier 2 |
| Investment | 94% | 23% | 14% | 41% | 19% | 9% | 76% | 5% | Tier 1 |
| Venture Capital | 92% | 15% | 14% | 33% | 20% | 15% | 79% | 2% | Tier 1 |
A median tier of Simple and mean of 1.26 make Accounting & Auditing the easiest to access programmatically within Financial Services. WAF (93%) and AI blocking (1%) are in line with cohort peers.