Overview
JavaScript and Rate Limiting both elevate Wellness's active barrier profile
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 98% |
| Antibot | 23% |
| CAPTCHA | 31% |
| JavaScript | 48% |
| Rate Limiting | 34% |
| TLS | 16% |
WAF leads at 98%. JavaScript (48%) and Rate Limiting (34%) together form a multi-layer active stack — more than most sectors deploy alongside WAF.
Barrier Landscape
JavaScript is Wellness's dominant secondary barrier by a wide margin
| Value | |
|---|---|
| WAF | 98% |
| Antibot | 23% |
| CAPTCHA | 31% |
| JavaScript | 48% |
| Rate Limiting | 34% |
| TLS | 16% |
| Has robots.txt | 83% |
| Blocks AI crawlers | 22% |
WAF at 98% and JavaScript at 48% together form the sector's main defensive layer. Rate Limiting (34%) follows at a distance. The barrier profile is concentrated rather than broadly spread.
Two-barrier stacks are Wellness's most common security posture
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 barriers | 1% |
| 1 barrier | 27% |
| 2 barriers | 31% |
| 3 barriers | 18% |
| 4 barriers | 8% |
| 5 barriers | 15% |
| 6 barriers | 0% |
31% of Wellness sites carry exactly 2 barriers. 41% stack three or more. 1% carry none — a low share of unprotected sites for this sector.
Wellness is predominantly Easy to access — with a notable Moderate minority
| Mean recommended tier | |
|---|---|
| All sites | 1.78 |
A mean recommended tier of 1.77 and a median of Easy place Wellness around the middle of the sectors surveyed. 40% of sites are Simple to access; 11% require Moderate or above.
Simple and Easy cover nine in ten Wellness sites
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 1 - Simple | 39.8% |
| 2 - Easy | 49% |
| 3 - Moderate | 6.1% |
| 4 - Complex | 4.1% |
| 5 - Advanced | 1% |
Easy (49%) is the most common tier. Simple and Easy together account for 89% of sites, while 6% land at Moderate and 5% at Complex or Advanced.
robots.txt
Most Wellness sites publish a robots.txt — coverage above the norm
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Publish a valid robots.txt | 83% |
83% of Wellness sites publish a valid robots.txt. The 17% without a file leave crawl policy undefined — a lower gap than the cross-sector average of around 24%.
Wellness sites name a handful of agents in robots.txt — few commit to comprehensive policies
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| 0 | 23% |
| 1 | 26% |
| 2–4 | 23% |
| 5–9 | 13% |
| 10–15 | 2% |
| 16+ | 13% |
The mean of 8.1 named agents reflects limited bot-policy investment in Wellness. 23% of sites name no agents; 26% name exactly one. Only 13% maintain a list of 16 or more named bots.
AI crawlers draw the most robots.txt attention in Wellness
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| AI crawlers | 24% |
| SEO / search indexing | 9% |
| SEO audit tools | 10% |
| Commercial scrapers | 12% |
| Social / content scrapers | 1% |
| Archive / research crawlers | 7% |
| Monitoring / uptime bots | 0% |
AI crawlers are mentioned by 24% of Wellness sites — the leading bot category. Commercial scrapers follows at 12%. Figures are percentages of all 100 Wellness sites including those with no robots.txt.
Uniform per-agent rules dominate Wellness robots.txt files
| % of sites | |
|---|---|
| Uniform per-agent rules | 46% |
| Path-level mixed rules | 34% |
| Allow-only (no Disallow rules) | 3% |
| Mixed AI posture | 4% |
| Blanket Disallow: / | 0% |
Uniform per-agent rules lead at 46%, with path-level mixed rules at 34%. Mixed AI posture (4%) and blanket Disallow (0%) are minimal.
AI crawlers are among the most-targeted agents in Wellness robots.txt
| Disallowed | Allowed (whitelisted) | |
|---|---|---|
| * | 73% | 34% |
| GPTBot | 21% | 6% |
| CCBot | 20% | — |
| ChatGPT-User | 15% | 5% |
| ClaudeBot | 16% | 1% |
| OAI-SearchBot | 12% | 4% |
| PerplexityBot | 12% | 2% |
| anthropic-ai | 12% | — |
| omgili | 10% | — |
| cohere-ai | 10% | — |
| Claude-Web | 9% | — |
| Bytespider | 8% | — |
| Perplexity-User | 8% | — |
| Amazonbot | 7% | — |
| Mediapartners-Google | 2% | 5% |
| Applebot-Extended | 6% | — |
| Diffbot | 6% | — |
| ImagesiftBot | 6% | — |
| omgilibot | 6% | — |
| Googlebot-Image | 2% | 4% |
| FacebookBot | 5% | — |
| Timpibot | 5% | — |
| Webzio-Extended | 5% | — |
| AdsBot-Google | 3% | 2% |
| FriendlyCrawler | 5% | — |
Values are percentages of all 100 Wellness sites surveyed. The wildcard (*) leads at 73% Disallow. Among named agents, GPTBot, CCBot lead the Disallow list — reflecting direct targeting of AI training and indexing bots.
Industry Cohort
Wellness leads the Healthcare cohort on AI-blocking policy
| WAF | Antibot | CAPTCHA | JavaScript | Rate Limit | TLS | robots.txt | Blocks AI | Tier | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthcare | 93% | 17% | 21% | 35% | 27% | 21% | 78% | 14% | Tier 2 |
| Medical Devices & Equipment | 92% | 13% | 22% | 45% | 16% | 8% | 81% | 8% | Tier 1 |
| Mental Health | 95% | 16% | 24% | 40% | 18% | 6% | 85% | 12% | Tier 1 |
| Pharmaceuticals | 84% | 20% | 25% | 54% | 27% | 8% | 62% | 5% | Tier 1 |
| Veterinary | 100% | 24% | 29% | 43% | 35% | 25% | 89% | 5% | Tier 1 |
| Wellness | 98% | 23% | 31% | 48% | 34% | 16% | 83% | 22% | Tier 2 |
Wellness's 22% AI-blocking rate in robots.txt is the highest in the Healthcare cohort. WAF (98%) and JavaScript (48%) sit at the cohort on technical barriers.