Skip to content
UA · UAH (₴) · Estimated Dev cost: ₴1,200/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-04-22 21:33 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
39.00s
Vs prev

Audit overview

3 categories need attention: Security, and 2 others.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

2

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

3

High impact, requires investment.

Easy Improvements

0

Small gains, minimal effort.

Nothing in this quadrant — good news.

Deprioritize

0

Low impact, high effort — do last.

Nothing in this quadrant — good news.

← Low effort High effort →

Screenshots

DESKTOP + MOBILE
Desktop
Desktop screenshot
Mobile
Mobile screenshot

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact
Critical: 1

Content-Security-Policy header is missing

Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything your users type — including credentials.

Security › Security Headers
Critical: 2

Cookie 'PHPSESSID' 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.

Security › Cookie Security
Critical: 3

No Content-Security-Policy header found

Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.

Security › Content Security Policy
Critical: 4

13 link(s) with no accessible text

Links with no accessible text (empty <a></a>, image-only no alt, icon-only no aria-label) are unidentifiable to screen readers.

Accessibility › Link & Button Quality
Critical: 5

4 control(s) without accessible label

Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.

Accessibility › Form Accessibility
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology — an estimated 15% of your potential audience. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
3 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
2 accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology.

Business case

What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.

Return on investment

₴9,300 investment → ₴262,942/month returns

Investment
₴9,300
7.8 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
₴262,942
₴3,155,298/yr
Payback
0.0 mo
+33828% Y1
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
₴7,5000.0 mo payback · +41971% Y1
Optimistic scenario assuming the top 3 capture most of the upside. Real-world recovery typically falls between this projection and the full-fix ROI above.
₴900 — in quick wins — start here for the fastest payback

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

7 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~23%.

Barriers
7
2 crit 5 warn
Bounce delta
+23pp
added vs baseline
Score
65
C
Speed
0
Trust
1
Usability
2
Content
2
Nav
2
  • Severe layout shift during page load
    Users mis-click when content jumps — converting intent into frustration
    → Reserve space for images, ads, and embeds with explicit width/height
  • 4 form field(s) without a label
    Screen readers skip unlabeled fields; autofill can't identify them; checkout abandonment spikes
    → Associate every input with a visible <label for="…">; add autocomplete attributes
  • No Content-Security-Policy header
    Higher 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 tags
    Links shared on LinkedIn / Slack / Facebook show bare URLs — referral clicks drop
    → Add og:title, og:description, og:image, og:url to the page head
  • No structured data
    No rich-result eligibility in Google — lower SERP CTR vs competitors with stars and prices
    → Add JSON-LD for your page type (Product, Article, FAQPage, LocalBusiness, …)

Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.

Remediation cost

₴9,300 7.8 developer hours at ₴1200/hr
Quick wins
₴900 2 fixes in ~45 minutes

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.

/hr

Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead

How developer rates are sourced

Warning:Cost of inaction

₴262,942 / month at risk ~₴3,155,298 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Bounce-Rate Cost

₴262,937 /mo

+23.5pp bounce · ~2,346 lost visitors/mo

CPC: UAH 112.08

Bandwidth Waste

₴4.93 /mo

1479.4 MB/mo × 3.333 UAH/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~148 KB per page load
    Saves ₴4.93/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.

Compliance methodology · SEO assumptions · Bandwidth model

Your performance is already good — improvements may show diminishing returns

Unique monthly visitors from your analytics

Purchases, signups, or key actions

Optional — for revenue estimation

additional conversions/month

more engaged visitors from reduced bounce

potential monthly revenue
Current bounce (est.)
After fixes (est.)
Estimated bounce reduction

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

Bounce-rate model & assumptions

Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers

Lighthouse

Mobile

73
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
71
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
96
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
100
SEO Measures basic SEO optimizations: meta tags, crawlability, link text, and mobile friendliness.

First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.

1.12 s

Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.

2.43 s

Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.

0 ms

Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.

0.983

Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.

1.37 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.

2.43 s

Desktop

75
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
71
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
100
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
100
SEO Measures basic SEO optimizations: meta tags, crawlability, link text, and mobile friendliness.

First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.

411 ms

Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.

793 ms

Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.

0 ms

Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.

1.073

Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.

613 ms

Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.

793 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 77.5

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

HSTS · 2617 peers
You 76
·
Avg 75
At average
0 50 100
Security P4Accessibility P5Performance P95Content P10Sustainability P80Infrastructure P70SEO P43Compliance P44

Top 10% of HSTS sites score 83+ on Security; you're at 60 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 55% of HSTS sites See full HSTS benchmark →
Apache · 463 peers
You 76
·
Avg 73
At average
0 50 100
Performance P95Accessibility P8Infrastructure P91Sustainability P88Security P15Content P24SEO P42Compliance P53

Top 10% of Apache sites score 70+ on Accessibility; you're at 49 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 74% of Apache sites See full Apache benchmark →

Technology stack

HSTS, on Apache/PHP, hosted on Apache HTTP Server

4 technologies detected 4 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Standard

Stack Architecture

Framework
HSTS
Runtime
PHP
Server
Apache
Hosting
Apache HTTP Server

All Detected Technologies (4)

Categories Server Website https://httpd.apache.org Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Server header: Apache

Apache is a free and open-source cross-platform web server software.

Categories Web servers Website https://httpd.apache.org/ Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

PHP is a general-purpose scripting language used for web development.

Categories Programming languages Website https://php.net Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.

Categories Security Website https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6797#section-6.1 Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (HSTS) 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.

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.

BeaverCheck badge

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkharkov.ua)](https://beavercheck.com/results/0d7b6038-78c8-4a59-a895-25e3d554da7f)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/0d7b6038-78c8-4a59-a895-25e3d554da7f"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkharkov.ua" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkharkov.ua

Export & share

Download the audit, share with your team, or grab a fix plan ready to copy into your tracker.

Share

Copies markdown to clipboard

Export
Download Markdown Report Download JSON

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 · 8h total → projected B (85)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 1h → B (80)
  • · Cookie 'PHPSESSID' is missing the Secure flag
  • · 13 link(s) with no accessible text

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+5

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 7h → B (85)
  • · 4 control(s) without accessible label
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found

Send Feedback