Audit overview
Security and Accessibility need attention; the other categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
3High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
2High 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.
HSTS header is missing
Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.
No Content-Security-Policy header found
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.
48 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.
No <main> landmark found
Without a <main> landmark, screen-reader users can't skip past the navigation to the page content — every page starts with re-reading the menu.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
€588 investment → €5,161/month returns + EUR 120,500,000 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
8 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~23%.
- Severe layout shift during page loadUsers mis-click when content jumps — converting intent into frustration→ Reserve space for images, ads, and embeds with explicit width/height
- 14 broken link(s) on the pageClicks land on 404s — trust drops and the session often ends→ Fix or remove the broken destinations surfaced on the Content tab
- 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 structured dataNo 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
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
€120.500.000
- No privacy policy link detectedGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundGDPR: EUR 5.000 – EUR 10.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
€5.161 /mo
+23.5pp bounce · ~2,346 lost visitors/mo
CPC: EUR 2.20
Bandwidth Waste
€0,09 /mo
1188.8 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~119 KB per page loadSaves €0,09/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.
1.94 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.38 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.
0.422
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
1.94 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.
2.39 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
685 ms
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
685 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.
0.059
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
685 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.
685 ms
Categories
8Performance
All checks pass
Security
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Accessibility
48 link(s) with no accessible text
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 WordPress sites score 78+ on Security; you're at 60 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 79+ on Security; you're at 60 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
WordPress, with Cloudflare CDN
Stack Architecture
WordPress 
HTTP/3 
LazySizes Masonry 
Mustache 4.0.1
Open Graph 
Priority Hints 
RSS 
Sentry 6.17.9
Cloudflare All Detected Technologies (12)
Cloudflare is a web-infrastructure and website-security company, providing content-delivery-network services, DDoS mitigation, Internet security, and distributed domain-name-server services.
HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.
LazySizes is a JavaScript library used to delay the loading of images (iframes, scripts, etc) until they come into view.
Masonry is a JavaScript library that enables a cascading grid layout, positioning elements based on available vertical space for an optimized, gap-free arrangement.
Mustache is a web template system.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.
RSS is a family of web feed formats used to publish frequently updated works—such as blog entries, news headlines, audio, and video—in a standardized format.
Sentry is an open-source platform for workflow productivity, aggregating errors from across the stack in real time.
Observations (3)
WordPress detected — review security configuration
WordPress sites benefit from: protecting wp-login.php, disabling XML-RPC if unused, restricting REST API access, and keeping all plugins and themes up to date. Check the Security tab for specific findings.
No build tool detected
A framework (Google Search Console) 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
12 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/results/0fc48987-b2d2-4399-b229-622f14201d87)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/0fc48987-b2d2-4399-b229-622f14201d87"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffinancesonline.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffinancesonline.comExport & 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 · 7h total → projected B (88)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+6Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · No <main> landmark found
- · HSTS header is missing
- · 48 link(s) with no accessible text
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+3Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
- · No Content-Security-Policy header found