Overview
JavaScript and CAPTCHA both elevate Social & Charitable Organizations's active barrier profile
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 94% |
| Antibot | 22% |
| CAPTCHA | 31% |
| JavaScript | 38% |
| Rate Limiting | 20% |
| TLS | 11% |
WAF leads at 94%. JavaScript (38%) and CAPTCHA (31%) together form a multi-layer active stack — more than most sectors deploy alongside WAF.
Barrier Landscape
WAF leads Social & Charitable Organizations at 94% — JavaScript is the main secondary layer
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 94% |
| Antibot | 22% |
| CAPTCHA | 31% |
| JavaScript | 38% |
| Rate Limiting | 20% |
| TLS | 11% |
| Has robots.txt | 79% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 5% |
WAF dominates at 94%. JavaScript (38%) leads active secondary barriers, followed by CAPTCHA (31%). The remaining three barriers all sit at or below 22% — a concentrated rather than broadly stacked profile.
Social & Charitable Organizations's barrier counts are spread — no single configuration dominates
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 6% |
| 1 barrier | 31% |
| 2 barriers | 28% |
| 3 barriers | 19% |
| 4 barriers | 8% |
| 5 barriers | 8% |
| 6 barriers | 0% |
Barrier counts vary widely across Social & Charitable Organizations sites. Single-barrier configurations are the modal count at 31%, but the distribution is broad. 35% of sites carry three or more.
Social & Charitable Organizations sites are predominantly Simple to access
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.33 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.33 and a median of Simple place Social & Charitable Organizations toward the easier end of the sectors surveyed. 81% of sites are Simple to access; 7% require Moderate or above.
Simple tier covers more than three-quarters of Social & Charitable Organizations sites
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 81% |
| 2 - Easy | 12% |
| 3 - Moderate | 3% |
| 4 - Complex | 1% |
| 5 - Advanced | 3% |
Simple (81%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 93% of sites, while 3% land at Moderate and 4% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Nearly four in five of Social & Charitable Organizations sites publish a robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 79% |
79% of Social & Charitable Organizations sites have a valid robots.txt. The remaining 21% leave crawl policy entirely undefined — a meaningful gap for a sector of this scale.
Most Social & Charitable Organizations sites name one bot or none in their robots.txt
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 41% |
| 1 | 37% |
| 2–4 | 11% |
| 5–9 | 6% |
| 10–15 | 1% |
| 16+ | 4% |
41% of Social & Charitable Organizations sites name zero agents and 37% name one. A mean of 3.5 is pulled up by a small number of sites with extensive policies, while the median stays at 1.
SEO / search indexing draw the most robots.txt attention in Social & Charitable Organizations
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 5% |
| SEO / search indexing | 7% |
| SEO audit tools | 7% |
| Commercial scrapers | 1% |
| Social / content scrapers | 5% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 3% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 0% |
SEO / search indexing and SEO audit tools are each named in 7% of Social & Charitable Organizations robots.txt files. All figures are percentages of all 100 sites including those with no robots.txt.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Social & Charitable Organizations robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 46% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 26% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 5% |
| Mixed AI posture | 1% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 2% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 46%, with path-level mixed rules at 26%. Mixed AI posture (1%) and blanket Disallow (2%) are minimal.
AhrefsBot leads named Disallow rules in Social & Charitable Organizations robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 51% | 29% |
| facebookexternalhit | 3% | 3% |
| Twitterbot | 1% | 4% |
| AhrefsBot | 5% | — |
| Amazonbot | 4% | 1% |
| Bytespider | 4% | 1% |
| Bingbot | 2% | 2% |
| Googlebot-News | 2% | 2% |
| MJ12bot | 4% | — |
| GPTBot | 3% | 1% |
| meta-externalagent | 3% | 1% |
| AdsBot-Google | 3% | 1% |
| Baiduspider | 3% | — |
| Googlebot | 2% | 1% |
| Slurp | 2% | 1% |
| BLEXBot | 3% | — |
| SemrushBot | 3% | — |
| Google-Extended | 3% | — |
| CCBot | 3% | — |
| FacebookBot | 2% | 1% |
| DuckDuckBot | 2% | — |
| YandexBot | 2% | — |
| ia_archiver | 2% | — |
| moget | 2% | — |
| Applebot | 1% | 1% |
Values are percentages of all 100 Social & Charitable Organizations sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 51% Disallow. Among named agents, AhrefsBot leads at 5%, with Amazonbot, Bytespider, and MJ12bot each at 4%.
Industry Cohort
Social & Charitable Organizations has the lowest WAF coverage in the Nonprofit cohort
| WAF | Antibot | CAPTCHA | JavaScript | Rate Limit | TLS | robots.txt | Blocks AI | Tier | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Museums | 95% | 27% | 32% | 43% | 22% | 13% | 78% | 13% | Tier 1 |
| Nonprofit Organizations | 96% | 18% | 19% | 45% | 24% | 17% | 83% | 10% | Tier 2 |
| Religion & Belief | 96% | 22% | 26% | 32% | 19% | 13% | 89% | 10% | Tier 1 |
| Social & Charitable Organizations | 94% | 22% | 31% | 38% | 20% | 11% | 79% | 5% | Tier 1 |
WAF at 94% is the lowest in the Nonprofit cohort. JavaScript (38%) compensates as the leading active barrier. Tier difficulty (mean 1.19) sits above the cohort median.