Homepage audit guide
Homepage Footer and Policy Trust
A manual path test for finding a policy, opening it, and confirming that it answers the shopper's real question.
Published · Updated
Short answer
Test footer and policy trust as a question-to-answer path: name the shopper question, find the visible link, open its final destination, locate the relevant answer, and compare that answer with nearby product, delivery, or return wording. Link presence alone does not prove reachability, useful content, applicability, or consistency. ReviewMyEcom does not currently automate this policy judgment.
Why it matters
A page can contain a Shipping or Returns link and still leave the decision unresolved: the destination may fail, the answer may not cover the shopper’s country or product, or the wording may conflict with the promise near the item. Separating those stages gives the merchant one repairable gap instead of a generic trust checklist or an unsupported conversion claim.
What to inspect
This is a manual walkthrough. ReviewMyEcom’s footer-link and FAQ classifiers did not meet the customer release gate and remain unavailable. Use the rendered homepage as context when reliable, then verify every link, destination, answer, scope, and consistency point yourself:
- Write one real shopper question, such as delivery timing, return eligibility, sizing help, warranty scope, or how to contact support.
- Record the visible link label and location that appears to answer it; do not infer a policy from an icon or browser title.
- Open the link, preserve the final URL and page state, and distinguish a missing path from a blocked, challenged, redirected, or empty destination.
- Quote the relevant answer, its country/product/time scope, and any conflicting wording near the product or delivery promise.
First-party audit pattern
A visible link is only the start of the evidence
In ReviewMyEcom’s July 15 bounded cohorts, the footer-link candidate produced 2 true positives, 1 false positive, 1 abstention, and 1 invalid actionable-evidence case; the FAQ-page candidate produced 6 true positives and 2 false positives. Both remain customer-unavailable. The evidence supports a safer manual chain: label, destination, answer, scope, and consistency.
- The record includes the shopper question, visible link text and location, final URL, and relevant answer in one trace.
- A blocked or challenged destination remains unknown instead of being called a missing policy.
- The review separates general site policy from country, product, sale-item, subscription, or other exceptions.
Diagram
Question-to-answer path
Follow the same route a shopper uses and stop where the evidence stops.
Question and visible route
Name the decision, then record the link label and where it appears.
Reachable final destination
Preserve redirects, failures, challenges, and the final policy page separately.
Relevant and consistent terms
Quote the answer, its scope, and any conflict with nearby promises.
Symptoms
- A likely policy or support link cannot be found from the product decision path or footer.
- The visible label opens a missing, empty, challenged, or unrelated destination.
- The page contains general policy text but not the country, product, timing, or exception relevant to the shopper.
- Delivery, return, guarantee, or support wording differs between the policy page and the nearby product promise.
How to check it
- Choose one current shopper question and start from the live mobile homepage or relevant product decision, not from an internal page list.
- Follow the most likely visible label, save its location and wording, and record every redirect through the final URL.
- Find and quote the exact answer, then mark its geography, product type, timing, sale, subscription, or other applicable scope.
- Compare that answer with the product page, announcement, delivery estimate, guarantee, or other wording that set the shopper’s expectation.
How to fix it
- Rename a vague link with the shopper question it actually answers, then place it where that question arises.
- Repair missing or redirected destinations before rewriting a policy that already contains the needed answer.
- Add the missing scope or exception in plain language and keep it consistent across the footer, policy page, product path, and applicable channel settings.
- Retest the public mobile route after publishing; do not rely on a theme editor or admin preview as reachability evidence.
Bad, better, best examples
Bad
Synthetic example: a footer label says Info, redirects twice, and lands on a blank page; delivery timing remains unknown.
Better
Synthetic example: a Shipping link opens a real page with a dispatch estimate, but it does not say which countries or products the estimate covers.
Best
Synthetic example: the delivery link is visible near the decision, opens a scoped answer, and matches the promise shown beside the product.
Common mistakes
- Treating a link count as proof that the shopper’s question is answered.
- Reporting an access challenge or browser block as a missing merchant policy.
- Copying one universal legal checklist across countries, product types, and selling channels without checking applicability.
- Updating a policy page while leaving contradictory delivery, return, or guarantee wording near the product.
Questions merchants ask
Which links should an ecommerce footer include?
There is no universal list for every store or jurisdiction. Start with the real questions your shoppers need answered, provide clear routes for the applicable shipping, returns, support, privacy, terms, sizing, warranty, or subscription topics, and test each public destination.
Does a visible policy link prove the store is compliant?
No. Presence does not prove reachability, completeness, applicability, consistency, or legal compliance. This guide is an evidence walkthrough, not legal advice.
Does ReviewMyEcom automatically audit footer and FAQ policies?
No. The footer-link and FAQ classifiers are currently unavailable to customers. Use reliable rendered context where available, then complete the label, destination, answer, scope, and consistency review manually.
Primary references
Channel-specific primary guidance for merchants using Shopping ads or free listings; it asks for clear website return information and consistency with Merchant Center. It is not a universal legal standard.
US-specific primary guidance on shipping representations, delays, and refunds for covered orders. Merchants should check the rules that apply to their own jurisdiction and offer.
Start with one shopper question, then follow the path
Run the free homepage teardown for currently supported visual context, then verify the policy route, answer, scope, and consistency manually.
Author and editorial note
Substantially revised from ReviewMyEcom’s July 15 footer and FAQ validation plus the current capability contract. AI assisted with structure and drafting; the manual evidence chain, synthetic examples, channel/jurisdiction qualifications, and product claims were checked. This is not legal advice, and no policy-to-conversion outcome is claimed.