tdeemacrocalculator.com is for sale

Read this part first

One click. That is the entire Google click total for the three months ending September 6, 2026, against 2,832 impressions, which works out at a 0.04% click-through rate. Twelve of the 112 URLs in the sitemap are indexed. Those numbers are at the top of this page rather than buried in it because anyone with Search Console access finds them in about ten minutes, and none of what follows is worth your time if this part is not straight. There is a section further down headed what is wrong with it. It is not padding.

What the index coverage actually means

Search Console sorts unindexed pages into named states, and the gap between two of those states is the most important thing on this page. Here is the coverage report as of September 4, 2026.

“Discovered, currently not indexed” means Google has the URL on file and has never fetched it. No request, no HTML read, no opinion formed. It is a crawl budget signal, and on a young domain carrying little authority it is the ordinary outcome.

“Crawled, currently not indexed” is a different animal. Google fetched the page, read it, and chose not to index it. That is a quality judgment, and it is the state you would worry about across a large programmatic library.

This site has 99 of the first and 4 of the second. Google has not examined the library and rejected it. It has not looked at it.

Every programmatic page Google crawled is indexed and ranks

Three pages out of the generated set made it into the index. All three rank inside the top twenty.

The impression counts are small, because a page sitting at position 10 to 18 on a narrow long-tail query does not get shown often. The positions are the part worth reading. 62 more programmatic pages are built from the same template and the same data, and they are sitting in the discovered-and-uncrawled pile.

They are not reskins of each other either. Two sibling pages from that set measured 1,685 and 1,791 words with 19.9 percent text similarity between them.

Bing clicks this site. Google does not.

The impression counts are close. The click counts are not: 62 against 1, which is 2.55% against 0.04%. Bing covers a longer window, so the rates matter more here than the totals.

The argument this supports is a narrow one, so here it is in full. If the titles and descriptions looked unappealing in a results list, or the pages read as filler from the snippet alone, the Bing click-through rate would be flat too. It is not flat. Same pages, same titles, same snippets, sixty-two times the clicks. What differs between the two engines is not the writing. It is how much of the library each one has bothered to fetch, and where it puts what it fetched. Google is withholding visibility, not approval.

Impressions by month

The reporting window opens on June 7 and the export stops on September 6, so the first and last rows are both partial. That makes the raw monthly totals incomparable, which is what the per-day column is for. July and August are the only complete months in the table, and August came in above July on both the total and the daily rate. Through August the direction is up. The absolute numbers are still small, and one click sits at the end of all of it.

September needs its own note, because at 28.0 per day it reads below August. The first three days of the month recorded 28, 45 and 47 impressions. That is 40.0 per day, close to August’s 44.6. The next three recorded 18, 15 and 15, or 16.0 per day, and that tail is what pulls the six-day average down. Search Console back-fills recent days for a while after it first reports them, so the final days of any export are routinely undercounted. That is the most likely explanation for the drop. It is not a certainty, and six days is not a trend in either direction, so do not read this row as growth and do not read it as decline. The account is the place to settle it: pull September in Search Console yourself, where those last days will have filled in by the time you look.

Devices

Desktop carries almost all of the impressions and has produced nothing: 2,570 impressions, zero clicks, average position 79.12. Position 79 is page eight. Nobody scrolls that far. The one click the site has came from mobile, where the average position is 53.09 across 258 impressions. Tablet recorded 4 impressions, which is too little to read anything into.

Hold the device split next to the position numbers. The gap between 79 and 53 is roughly the difference between page eight and page six. Neither is a page a buyer would want to be on.

What is included

• 20 calculator tools
• 65 programmatic pages (60 under /calories-for, 5 under /tdee-for)
• 10 long-form guides
• 6 trust and policy pages
• 1 embed widget generator
• 112 URLs in the sitemap, 121 pages in the production build
• 20 calculation verification tests and 7 functional checks, both runnable from npm scripts

The stack is Next.js 16, React 19, TypeScript in strict mode, Tailwind v4 and Vercel. Every page is prerendered at build time, and a deploy is the only thing that refreshes any of it. That is on purpose. An earlier configuration used timed revalidation and produced a Vercel bill to match, so the site now builds static and the revalidation meter reads zero. There is no database and no request-time data layer. Three API routes run dynamically: the contact form, the OG image generator, and a region lookup that decides whether a visitor from the EEA, the UK or Switzerland sees the consent banner. Google Analytics 4 and that banner are wired but stay off until a GA4 measurement ID is set, and production has none today, so the region lookup currently goes unused.

The repository carries a buyer handoff document covering environment variables, the accounts that need transferring, and the operational traps worth knowing about before the first deploy.

Built, wired, and not yet earning

Two things here are finished code that no traffic has met. They are listed as work a buyer does not have to do, not as value a buyer should pay for.

• The embed widget. A generator at /embed-code hands another site an iframe snippet that drops the calculator onto their page. It works, and to date nobody has embedded it. Google Analytics and the consent banner are switched off inside the frame. Vercel Analytics and Speed Insights, which set no cookies, still load there.
• No email list, on purpose. The site tells visitors there is no account and no email gate, and then keeps that promise: there is no capture form and no list to hand over. A buyer who wants one is going back on something the pages say out loud. That is a fair decision to make, and a deliberate one to make knowingly.

What is wrong with it

Every item below is checkable in the same two accounts as everything above it. It sits on the page rather than in a diligence reply because a seller who names the problems is easier to verify than one who waits to be asked.

How to verify all of this

The Google figures come from Search Console under Performance, web search, with the range set to the three months ending September 6, 2026. The coverage table comes from the Pages report as of September 4, 2026. The Bing figures come from Bing Webmaster Tools for April 24 to September 6, 2026. Read access to both accounts can be granted before any money moves, and that is the fastest way to check every number on this page against its source.

The content counts come from the repository and from the route table of a production build. The sitemap is public at tdeemacrocalculator.com/sitemap.xml, and the calculators, guides and generated pages are all live and readable without an account. Ask for a walkthrough of any of it.

Talking to the owner

No price is listed here, on purpose. If the property is interesting to you, send an offer, or send the list of things you want to see before you make one. Questions about the code, the hosting, the analytics, the content process, or anything in the section above get a direct answer.

Email hello@tdeemacrocalculator.com.