Overview
JavaScript leads Investment's secondary barrier stack above the norm
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 94% |
| Antibot | 23% |
| CAPTCHA | 14% |
| JavaScript | 41% |
| Rate Limiting | 19% |
| TLS | 9% |
WAF at 94% is the dominant barrier. JavaScript (41%) leads secondary coverage. The remaining barriers sit materially lower, giving Investment a narrow but defined secondary layer.
Barrier Landscape
WAF leads Investment at 94% — JavaScript is the main secondary layer
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 94% |
| Antibot | 23% |
| CAPTCHA | 14% |
| JavaScript | 41% |
| Rate Limiting | 19% |
| TLS | 9% |
| Has robots.txt | 76% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 5% |
WAF dominates at 94%. JavaScript (41%) leads active secondary barriers, followed by Antibot (23%). The remaining three barriers all sit at or below 19% — a concentrated rather than broadly stacked profile.
Two-barrier stacks are Investment's most common security posture
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 6% |
| 1 barrier | 31% |
| 2 barriers | 37% |
| 3 barriers | 16% |
| 4 barriers | 4% |
| 5 barriers | 5% |
| 6 barriers | 1% |
37% of Investment sites carry exactly 2 barriers. 26% stack three or more. 6% carry none — a low share of unprotected sites for this sector.
Simple is the dominant access tier across Investment sites
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.37 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.37 and a median of Simple place Investment toward the easier end of the sectors surveyed. 69% of sites are Simple to access; 4% require Moderate or above.
Simple is the dominant tier in Investment, but Easy accounts for a significant share
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 69% |
| 2 - Easy | 27% |
| 3 - Moderate | 2% |
| 4 - Complex | 2% |
| 5 - Advanced | 0% |
Simple (69%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 96% of sites, while 2% land at Moderate and 2% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Around three-quarters of Investment sites publish a robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 76% |
76% of Investment sites have a valid robots.txt. The remaining 24% leave crawl policy entirely undefined — a meaningful gap for a sector of this scale.
Investment sites name a handful of agents in robots.txt — few commit to comprehensive policies
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 33% |
| 1 | 41% |
| 2–4 | 14% |
| 5–9 | 4% |
| 10–15 | 1% |
| 16+ | 7% |
The mean of 8.0 named agents reflects limited bot-policy investment in Investment. 33% of sites name no agents; 41% name exactly one. Only 7% maintain a list of 16 or more named bots.
SEO / search indexing draw the most robots.txt attention in Investment
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 9% |
| SEO / search indexing | 14% |
| SEO audit tools | 7% |
| Commercial scrapers | 2% |
| Social / content scrapers | 4% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 8% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 1% |
SEO / search indexing are named in 14% of Investment robots.txt files, followed by AI crawlers at 9%. All figures are percentages of all 100 sites including those with no robots.txt.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Investment robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 41% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 31% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 4% |
| Mixed AI posture | 1% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 0% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 41%, with path-level mixed rules at 31%. Mixed AI posture (1%) and blanket Disallow (0%) are minimal.
AI crawlers are among the most-targeted agents in Investment robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 59% | 36% |
| GPTBot | 4% | 3% |
| AhrefsBot | 5% | 1% |
| Baiduspider | 5% | 1% |
| CCBot | 5% | 1% |
| DataForSeoBot | 5% | 1% |
| Googlebot | 3% | 3% |
| MJ12bot | 4% | 1% |
| Alexibot | 4% | — |
| Aqua_Products | 4% | — |
| BackDoorBot/1.0 | 4% | — |
| BecomeBot | 4% | — |
| BlowFish/1.0 | 4% | — |
| Bookmark search tool | 4% | — |
| BotALot | 4% | — |
| BuiltBotTough | 4% | — |
| Bullseye/1.0 | 4% | — |
| BunnySlippers | 4% | — |
| CheeseBot | 4% | — |
| CherryPicker | 4% | — |
| CherryPickerElite/1.0 | 4% | — |
| CherryPickerSE/1.0 | 4% | — |
| Copernic | 4% | — |
| CopyRightCheck | 4% | — |
| Crescent | 4% | — |
Values are percentages of all 100 Investment sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 59% Disallow. Among named agents, AhrefsBot, Baiduspider, CCBot, and DataForSeoBot are tied at the top of the Disallow list — reflecting direct targeting of SEO audit, search, and AI training bots.
Industry Cohort
Investment leads the Financial Services cohort on JavaScript deployment
| 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 |
Investment's 41% JavaScript adoption rate leads all sub-categories in Financial Services. WAF (94%) is also near the top. Tier difficulty (mean 1.36) is in line with cohort peers.