Skip to content
RU · RUB (₽) · Estimated Dev cost: ₽3,500/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-04-21 23:32 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
4.3m
Vs prev

Audit overview

Performance and Accessibility 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

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: 3

Page weighs 6.6 MB (3.9 MB transferred)

Informational: total page weight (uncompressed) and bytes actually transferred over the wire.

Performance › Page Weight Budget
Warning: 4

is missing width/height — may cause layout shift

Performance issues directly impact user engagement and conversion rates.

Performance › Image Optimization
Warning: 5

119 third-party resources (100% of weight)

Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.

Performance › Page Weight Inventory
What fixing these means. Your site has several issues that may be affecting user experience and business outcomes. Your LCP of 14.4s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 3 performance issues below directly contribute to it. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
2 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
Your LCP is 14.4s — fixing the 3 performance criticals could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.

Business case

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

Return on investment

₽28,000 investment → ₽193,355/month returns

Investment
₽28 000
8.0 h · 3 findings
Monthly returns
₽193 355
₽2 320 264/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+8187% Y1
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
₽28 0000.1 mo payback · +8187% 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.

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

5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~32%.

Barriers
5
2 crit 3 warn
Bounce delta
+32pp
added vs baseline
Score
71
B
Speed
2
Trust
2
Usability
1
Content
0
Nav
0
  • Page takes 14.4s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 11.9s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • No viewport meta tag
    Mobile browsers render at desktop width and shrink — text unreadable, tap targets miniature
    → Add <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
  • High main-thread blocking time
    Page is non-interactive for 362ms 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

₽28,000 8.0 developer hours at ₽3500/hr

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

₽193 344 / month at risk ~₽2 320 128 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Bounce-Rate Cost

₽193 254 /mo

+32.2pp bounce · ~3,221 lost visitors/mo

CPC: RUB 60.00

Bandwidth Waste

₽90 /mo

12326.9 MB/mo × 7.273 RUB/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~1.2 MB per page load
    Saves ₽90/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 3 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

50
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
63
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.

3.87 s

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

14.40 s

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

362 ms

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

0.010

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

10.32 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.

14.51 s

Desktop

75
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
51
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.
92
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.

798 ms

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

3.11 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.

0.046

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

2.81 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.

3.13 s

Categories

6
Avg score 69.8

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Search Console · 3990 peers
You 68
·
Avg 74
-6 below average
0 50 100
Performance P1Accessibility P9Infrastructure P27Security P71Sustainability P41Compliance P49

Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 89+ on Performance; you're at 64 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 3% of Google Search Console sites See full Google Search Console benchmark →
HSTS · 2715 peers
You 68
·
Avg 75
-7 below average
0 50 100
Performance P1Accessibility P7Infrastructure P23Sustainability P34Security P57Compliance P51

Top 10% of HSTS sites score 92+ on Performance; you're at 64 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 1% of HSTS sites See full HSTS benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Search Console

2 technologies detected 1 stack layers Minimal

Stack Architecture

Framework
Google Search Console HSTS

All Detected Technologies (2)

Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: google-site-verification=XU98TH0ZNHv7hc8Gki9Cxhg3-F1k579Gp1jXfbGfCdY

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 (2)

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.

Minimal technology footprint

Only 2 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%2Finterfax.ru)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/interfax.ru)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/interfax.ru"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Finterfax.ru" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Finterfax.ru

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 C (78)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → C (72)
  • · Page weighs 6.6 MB (3.9 MB transferred)
  • · 119 third-party resources (100% of weight)

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+6

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 8h → C (78)
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found
  • · is missing width/height — may cause layout shift

Send Feedback