Pricing Audit

Pricing page teardown · Developer platform

GitHub: clarity, trust & conversion friction

Scored · lens: hybrid (self-serve + sales) motion, optimizing for sign-up

Overall rubric score

83

Strong — 83/100

The average of our five category scores below. This is our automated reading of the page's HTML on the date shown, not a verdict on the business or a measure of how buyers respond.

By category

  • Clarity100
    • Strength: The title has at least 12 characters.
    • Strength: The page has a meta description of at least 30 characters.
    • Strength: The page has an H1 heading.
    • Strength: At least three plans are named in headings.
    • Strength: At least one US-dollar price is in the HTML.
    • Strength: Monthly or annual billing is mentioned.
    • Strength: The page has at least 150 words of text.
  • Trust75
    • Strength: 2 trust cues are on the page.
    • Gap: Fewer than three trust cues were found in the fetched HTML.
    • Strength: The page uses social-proof wording such as trusted by.
    • Gap: The fetched HTML does not say that no credit card is required.
    • Strength: A free trial is mentioned.
    • Strength: Security, refund or cancellation terms are mentioned.
  • Plan differentiation100
    • Strength: At least three plans are named.
    • Strength: The page has a table or a compare-plans section.
    • Strength: There are about as many prices as plans.
    • Strength: The page has headings beyond the plan names.
  • CTA friction82
    • Strength: A call to action matches a self-serve conversion goal.
    • Gap: The fetched HTML has more than three distinct calls to action outside navigation.
    • Strength: A US-dollar price is on the page.
  • Objection handling60
    • Gap: No FAQ section was found in the fetched HTML.
    • Strength: The page mentions at least three common objection topics.
    • Strength: Billing terms are mentioned.
    • Strength: Support, security or refunds are mentioned.

What the checks found in the page's HTML

The text our checks matched in the HTML of GitHub’s pricing page. Matching is automatic and can miss or misread an item, so the live page is the source.

Plan names matched

  • Free
  • Team
  • Enterprise

US-dollar prices matched

  • $0
  • $4
  • $21
  • $0.18
  • $0.07
  • $5

Calls to action matched

  • Start free for 30 days
  • Create a free organization
  • Start a free trial
  • Contact Sales
  • Get started for free
  • Contact our sales team

Trust wording matched

  • SOC1, SOC2, type 2 reports annually
  • Code Security
  • Annual billing mentioned
  • Monthly billing mentioned
  • Free trial mentioned
  • No-credit-card mentioned
  • Contact-sales path
  • Table or compare section
  • Has FAQ
  • Social-proof wording

What could be clearer

Suggestions from our fixed rubric, based on the matches above. They are our opinion about what to add or make clearer, not a statement about results.

  1. Answer common pricing objections on-page

    low

    Why: No FAQ section was found in the fetched HTML.

    How: Add a concise FAQ that answers billing, cancellation, support, implementation, and security questions before buyers need to ask sales.

    • No FAQ questions found in the fetched HTML.
    • Objection topics mentioned: security, support, credit card, invoice, usage

How we scored this

Scored on our 100-point rubric for clarity, trust, plan differentiation, CTA friction, and objection handling on . This is our automated reading of the public page, not GitHub's claim. We fetch the page once, without running its scripts, and match named plans, US-dollar prices, calls to action, trust wording, and FAQ questions in the HTML it returns. A browser may show more than this, so "not found" means not found in that HTML. The rubric checks whether these elements are present. It does not measure how buyers respond or how the page converts.

Clarity
Does the HTML name the plans, show US-dollar prices and state billing terms?
Trust
Does the HTML include trust wording such as security, refunds or customer proof?
Plan differentiation
Does the HTML name several plans, with a table or a compare-plans section?
CTA friction
Does a call to action in the HTML match the chosen sales motion and goal?
Objection handling
Does the HTML include an FAQ and mention common objection topics?

Source: https://github.com/pricing (the page we fetched on ).

Pricing Page Teardown: GitHub — clarity, trust & conversion friction (November 2026)