Skip to content
CN · CNY (¥) · Estimated Applicable regulations: PIPL Dev cost: ¥350/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-05-29 15:27 UTC
Worker
🇸🇬 Singapore
Duration
1.5m
Vs prev

Global Performance

6/6 locations

High global latency — average 2727ms across 6 locations, fastest from Santa Clara (1223ms), slowest from Singapore (3996ms). No CDN detected. 6 locations above the 500ms target.

Singapore - Singapore
Full audit
3996ms
DNS 115ms · TLS 1344ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
1331ms
DNS 474ms · TLS 420ms
United States - Santa Clara
1223ms
DNS 336ms · TLS 549ms
Spain - Madrid
3362ms
DNS 807ms · TLS 1293ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
3372ms
DNS 776ms · TLS 1890ms
United Stated - New York
3078ms
DNS 2150ms · TLS 472ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 2727ms · Cache: no-cache

Audit overview

Compliance and Content need attention; the other categories are in good shape.

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 'acw_tc' 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

HSTS header is missing

Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.

Security › Security Headers
Critical: 4

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: 5

3 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. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
4 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
1 accessibility issue excludes 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

¥2,625 investment → ¥48,822/month returns + CNY 50,000,000 risk avoided

Investment
¥2,625
7.5 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
¥48,822
¥585,866/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+22219% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided CNY 50,000,000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
¥1,2250.0 mo payback · +47726% 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.
¥175 — 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

11 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~34%.

Barriers
11
2 crit 9 warn
Bounce delta
+34pp
added vs baseline
Score
53
D
Speed
2
Trust
2
Usability
2
Content
3
Nav
2
  • Page takes 11.3s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 8.8s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • 3 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
  • High main-thread blocking time
    Page is non-interactive for 484ms after first paint
    → Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
  • No HSTS header
    Returning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request
    → Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
  • 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

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

Remediation cost

¥2,625 7.5 developer hours at ¥350/hr
Quick wins
¥175 2 fixes in ~30 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

¥33,726 / month at risk ~¥404,713 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

¥50,000,000

PIPL
  • No privacy policy link detected
    PIPL: CNY 100,000 – CNY 50,000,000
  • 1 non-essential cookie(s) set without consent banner
    PIPL: CNY 100,000 – CNY 50,000,000
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    PIPL: CNY 100,000 – CNY 50,000,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

¥33,722 /mo

+33.7pp bounce · ~3,372 lost visitors/mo

CPC: CNY 10.00

Bandwidth Waste

¥3.87 /mo

6775.3 MB/mo × 0.571 CNY/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~678 KB per page load
    Saves ¥3.87/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

44
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
31
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.
73
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.

5.10 s

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

11.29 s

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

484 ms

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

0.002

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

11.03 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.

12.80 s

Desktop

64
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
40
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.
73
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.

2.07 s

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

3.49 s

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

65 ms

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

0.000

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

5.25 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.

3.54 s

Categories

8
Avg score 74.8

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Vue.js · 210 peers
You 77
·
Avg 72
At average
0 50 100
Better than 83% of Vue.js sites See full Vue.js benchmark →

Technology stack

Vue.js

1 technologies detected 1 stack layers Minimal

Stack Architecture

Framework
Vue.js

All Detected Technologies (1)

Vue.js is an open-source model–view–viewmodel JavaScript framework for building user interfaces and single-page applications.

Categories JavaScript frameworks Website https://vuejs.org Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (Vue.js) 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.

Minimal technology footprint

Only 1 technologies detected. This suggests a simple setup with minimal dependencies — excellent for performance and security.

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%2Fqymall.pbsp.cn)](https://beavercheck.com/results/0f07a80c-8422-4cd5-8c01-8541f5ca5ba8)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/0f07a80c-8422-4cd5-8c01-8541f5ca5ba8"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fqymall.pbsp.cn" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fqymall.pbsp.cn

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 (83)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+5

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → B (82)
  • · Cookie 'acw_tc' is missing the Secure flag
  • · HSTS header is missing

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+1

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 7h → B (83)
  • · 3 control(s) without accessible label
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found

Send Feedback