Audit overview
3 categories need attention: Performance, and 2 others.
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)
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.
Cookie '_routing_id' 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.
1 control(s) without accessible label
Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.
Soft 404: server returns HTTP 200 for non-existent pages
Soft 404s (HTTP 200 for missing pages) confuse Google — it indexes the 'not found' page as real content and ranks it.
113 third-party resources (97% of weight)
Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
$775 investment → $9,992/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
6 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~30%.
- Page takes 13.3s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 10.8s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 2.0sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- 3 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 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
- 1 form field(s) without a labelScreen readers skip unlabeled fields; autofill can't identify them; checkout abandonment spikes→ Associate every input with a visible <label for="…">; add autocomplete attributes
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
- 1 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- 1 tracking cookie(s) set before consent interactionCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- 1 control(s) without accessible labelADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000
Bounce-Rate Cost
$8,161 /mo
+30.3pp bounce · ~3,034 lost visitors/mo
CPC: USD 2.69
Bandwidth Waste
$0.84 /mo
10499.7 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~1.0 MB per page loadSaves $0.84/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 4 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.
11.41 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
13.26 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
2.03 s
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.028
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
11.41 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.
20.66 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
2.70 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.72 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
598 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.
3.82 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.
5.86 s
Categories
8Performance
113 third-party resources (97% of weight)
Security
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Accessibility
1 control(s) without accessible label
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 core-js sites score 95+ on SEO; you're at 76 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Arkose Labs, hosted on Amazon Web Services, with Amazon S3 CDN
Stack Architecture
Facebook Login 
Linkedin Ads 
Arkose Labs Facebook SDK Google Play app HSTS 
HTTP/3 
Open Graph 
Priority Hints 
React 
React Router 7.14.0
core-js 2.5.7
reCAPTCHA 
Amazon S3 
Envoy 
Amazon Web Services All Detected Technologies (16)
Amazon S3 or Amazon Simple Storage Service is a service offered by Amazon Web Services (AWS) that provides object storage through a web service interface.
Envoy is an open-source edge and service proxy, designed for cloud-native applications.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a comprehensive cloud services platform offering compute power, database storage, content delivery and other functionality.
Arkose Labs is a toolkit for fraud prevention that provides solutions to detect and mitigate malicious activity across digital platforms.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.
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.
React is an open-source JavaScript library for building user interfaces or UI components.
React Router provides declarative routing for React.
core-js is a modular standard library for JavaScript, with polyfills for cutting-edge ECMAScript features.
reCAPTCHA is a free service from Google that helps protect websites from spam and abuse.
Facebook Login is a way for people to create accounts and log into your app across multiple platforms.
Linkedin Ads is a paid marketing tool that offers access to Linkedin social networks through various sponsored posts and other methods.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Arkose Labs) 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/results/3f58ee6a-3bb2-446c-bd04-487b88eb6917)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/3f58ee6a-3bb2-446c-bd04-487b88eb6917"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fin.pinterest.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fin.pinterest.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
3 sprints · 8h total → projected B (84)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+5Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · Cookie '_routing_id' is missing the Secure flag
- · Soft 404: server returns HTTP 200 for non-existent pages
- · 113 third-party resources (97% of weight)
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · 1 control(s) without accessible label
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+3Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source