Generated from Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence's audit data
Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence scores 58/100 across 6 category checks, which tracks in the middle band, with 3 of 6 categories below the headline. Strengths: description & content holds at 80/100, so the listing isn't fundamentally broken — the lift is in tightening specific weaknesses. Watch-items: languages (0/100) and technical & support (50/100) drag the average down; lifting languages is the single largest available lever. Per-category breakdown below.
This is an independent listing audit for Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence on Atlassian. It scored 58/100 (grade C) on today's snapshot. Top strength: Description & Content at 80/100. Biggest gap: Languages at 0/100. We re-audit every 24 hours from the canonical Atlassian listing.
Six weighted areas, pass / warning / fail per check, tiers at 85 / 65. Full methodology · Glossary
Last updated: July 8, 2026
Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence's overall score of 58/100 is a mid-tier result — the listing is functional but multiple categories have headroom, computed as the weighted average of 6 category checks. The spread is highly polarized across categories — 3 categories score above the headline number and 3 score below. The strongest category is Description & Content (80/100, +22 vs overall); the weakest is Languages (0/100), a 58-point gap below the headline score — the largest single lever. Top three by score: Description & Content (80), Title Optimization (75), Categories & Discoverability (63).
Scoring criteria, category weightings, and the full rubric (identical across every Atlassian Marketplace listing AppRanks audits) are documented on the methodology page and the audit-score glossary entry. Disputes or data corrections: [email protected].
Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence scored 58/100 in the AppRanks listing audit — a mid-tier result with room to improve. The score is the weighted average of 6 category checks: Title Optimization 75/100, Description & Content 80/100, Visual Assets 50/100, Categories & Discoverability 63/100, Technical & Support 50/100, Languages 0/100. Each category is scored against a fixed rubric that is identical for every app on the platform, so scores are directly comparable across Atlassian listings.
Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence's strongest audit area is Description & Content, scored at 80/100. Of the 5 checks AppRanks runs in this category, 3 pass cleanly, with the remainder in warning rather than failing state. This is the dimension a competing listing would need to match before Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence loses its current edge in this category.
The weakest area in Better Content Archiving and Analytics for Confluence's audit is Languages, scored at 0/100. The failing checks are language count, each with a concrete fix described below. Tightening this category is the highest-impact change available to the listing — its weight in the overall score makes it the lever most likely to move the headline number on the next refresh.