Audit overview
4 categories need attention: Security, and 3 others.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
4High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
1High impact, requires investment.
Easy Improvements
0Small gains, minimal effort.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Deprioritize
0Low impact, high effort — do last.
Nothing in this quadrant — good news.
Screenshots
Top Priorities (5)
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything your users type — including credentials.
Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-0' is missing the Secure flag
A cookie without the Secure flag can leak over HTTP — in HSTS-protected sites, this is still a defense-in-depth gap.
Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-1' is missing the Secure flag
A cookie without the Secure flag can leak over HTTP — in HSTS-protected sites, this is still a defense-in-depth gap.
Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-2' is missing the Secure flag
A cookie without the Secure flag can leak over HTTP — in HSTS-protected sites, this is still a defense-in-depth gap.
Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-3' is missing the Secure flag
A cookie without the Secure flag can leak over HTTP — in HSTS-protected sites, this is still a defense-in-depth gap.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
$400 investment → $8,279/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided
Figures combine localized regulatory fine ceilings, search/conversion value priced against local CPC, and bandwidth waste estimates. Results depend on implementation quality and audience composition. Not legal or financial advice.
Conversion barriers
9 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~31%.
- Page takes 15.2s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 12.7s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 698msClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- No HSTS headerReturning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request→ Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
- No Content-Security-Policy headerHigher XSS blast radius — one compromised script can exfiltrate the checkout form→ Ship a reporting-only CSP first, then enforce once violations are clean
- No Open Graph tagsLinks shared on LinkedIn / Slack / Facebook show bare URLs — referral clicks drop→ Add og:title, og:description, og:image, og:url to the page head
Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.
Remediation cost
Start here for the best return on investment
Cost by category
Cost by effort level
Adjust assumptions
Team composition
Multiplier applied to dev hours to reflect QA, design, and PM overhead. Use Dev only for solo work; Full team for projects with formal review processes.
Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead
Warning:Cost of inaction
Compliance Risk
$157,500
- No privacy policy link detectedCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- Trackers detected but no privacy policy foundCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
Bounce-Rate Cost
$8,277 /mo
+30.8pp bounce · ~3,077 lost visitors/mo
CPC: USD 2.69
Bandwidth Waste
$1.85 /mo
23097.0 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~2.3 MB per page loadSaves $1.85/mo
Compliance figures represent the statutory maximum fine for the most severe triggered category, capped per regulation — not the sum of per-finding penalties. Based on published regulatory fine ranges. This is not legal advice.
Unique monthly visitors from your analytics
Purchases, signups, or key actions
Optional — for revenue estimation
more engaged visitors from reduced bounce
Fix 5 critical issues to capture this value
How this is calculated
Based on Google/Deloitte research ("Milliseconds Make Millions") showing a ~7% bounce rate increase per additional second of LCP above the 2.5s "Good" threshold.
Your site's LCP: → estimated after fixes.
These are estimates based on industry research — actual results vary
Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers
Lighthouse
Mobile
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
10.23 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
15.21 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
698 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.008
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
10.23 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
32.47 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
3.01 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.80 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
21 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.248
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
3.01 s
Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.
5.07 s
Categories
8Performance
All checks pass
Security
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Accessibility
All checks pass
SEO
All checks pass
Infrastructure
All checks pass
Compliance
All checks pass
Content
All checks pass
Sustainability
All checks pass
How you compare
Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.
Top 10% of Apple sites score 77+ on Security; you're at 60 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Amazon ALB, on Java, hosted on AWS, with AWS CloudFront CDN
Stack Architecture
Matomo Analytics 
Amazon ALB Apple 
Google Font API Google Search Console HSTS Microsoft Microsoft 365 
Monsido 
YouTube 
Java 
AWS CloudFront Amazon CloudFront 
Nginx 
AWS Amazon Web Services All Detected Technologies (16)
Amazon CloudFront is a fast content delivery network (CDN) service that securely delivers data, videos, applications, and APIs to customers globally with low latency, high transfer speeds.
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a comprehensive cloud services platform offering compute power, database storage, content delivery and other functionality.
Java is a class-based, object-oriented programming language that is designed to have as few implementation dependencies as possible.
Amazon Application Load Balancer (ALB) distributes incoming application traffic to increase availability and support content-based routing.
Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Monsido provides a website management platform that automates processes, ensures regulatory compliance, improves collaboration in web and marketing teams, and streamlines reporting.
YouTube is a video sharing service where users can create their own profile, upload videos, watch, like and comment on other videos.
Matomo Analytics is a free and open-source web analytics application, that runs on a PHP/MySQL web-server.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Amazon ALB) was detected but no bundler was identified. The build tool may not be detectable from output patterns, or the site may use the framework's built-in bundler.
Complex technology stack detected
16 technologies identified. A complex stack increases maintenance burden and attack surface. Consider whether all components are actively needed.
Show your score
Drop this badge on your README, marketing site, or status page. It auto-updates every time the audit re-runs and links back to this report.
This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.
[](https://beavercheck.com/sites/ohio.gov)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/ohio.gov"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fohio.gov" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fohio.govExport & share
Download the audit, share with your team, or grab a fix plan ready to copy into your tracker.
Copies markdown to clipboard
Fix Plan
Three-week roadmap to ship the audit's findings, with one-click copy targets for your tracker.
Three-week fix plan
2 sprints · 4h total → projected C (76)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+8Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-0' is missing the Secure flag
- · Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-1' is missing the Secure flag
- · Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-2' is missing the Secure flag
- · Cookie 'AWSALBAPP-3' is missing the Secure flag
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Content-Security-Policy header is missing