Skip to content
https://global-shayari-ai.ai.studio Export & share
Recent Trends
Performance stable →
92
TTFB degrading ↓
165ms
FCP improving ↑
2.1s
LCP improving ↑
3.1s
Scanned
2026-08-21 03:14 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
2.0m
Vs prev
Improved by +5

Global Performance

6/6 locations

High global latency — average 601ms across 6 locations, fastest from Amsterdam (83ms), slowest from Singapore (1271ms). No CDN detected. Cache-Control disables caching (no-store). 3 locations above the 500ms target.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
134ms
DNS 24ms · TLS 23ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
83ms
DNS 14ms · TLS 7ms
United Stated - New York
492ms
DNS 97ms · TLS 12ms
Singapore - Singapore
1271ms
DNS 50ms · TLS 6ms
United States - Santa Clara
692ms
DNS 45ms · TLS 24ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
932ms
DNS 56ms · TLS 56ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 601ms · Cache: no-store

Audit overview

Compliance needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

3

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

2

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

Your mail setup has problems.

ai.studio fails 2 mail checks: No DMARC record found, No SPF record found. This is the kind of misconfiguration that sends your mail to spam.

Get a full deliverability audit — €179, 48h →

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact
Critical: 1

'unsafe-eval' found in script source

Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.

Security › Content Security Policy
Critical: 2

'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.

Security › Content Security Policy
Critical: 3

Cookie 'GAESA' 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: 4

1 button(s) with no accessible text

Buttons with no accessible text (icon-only, no aria-label) can't be activated by voice control or understood by screen readers.

Accessibility › Link & Button Quality
Critical: 5

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.

Accessibility › 404 Error Page
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.
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

$1,325 investment → $7,488/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided

Investment
$1,325
13.3 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
$7,488
$89,850/yr
Payback
0.2 mo
+6681% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided USD 157,500
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
$1,2250.2 mo payback · +7235% 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.
$125 — 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

5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~17%.

Barriers
5
5 warn
Bounce delta
+17pp
added vs baseline
Score
85
A
Speed
1
Trust
1
Usability
0
Content
1
Nav
2
  • Page loads in 3.1s
    Every additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 575ms over
    → Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
  • 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
  • Content is hard to read
    Graduate-level reading difficulty — limits the addressable audience for product or blog pages
    → Shorten sentences; replace jargon with plain language; target Flesch ease ≥60
  • No skip-to-content link
    Keyboard and screen-reader users must tab through the entire header on every page
    → Add a visible-on-focus <a href="#main">Skip to content</a> as the first focusable element
  • 2 broken link(s) on the page
    Clicks land on 404s — trust drops and the session often ends
    → Fix or remove the broken destinations surfaced on the Content tab

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

Remediation cost

$1,325 13.3 developer hours at $100/hr
Quick wins
$125 3 fixes in ~75 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

$6,405 / month at risk ~$76,858 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

$157,500

ADA Title IIICCPA/CPRA
  • No privacy policy link detected
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • 1 non-essential cookie(s) set without consent banner
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500

Bounce-Rate Cost

$6,405 /mo

+16.9pp bounce · ~1,685 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 3.80

Bandwidth Waste

$0.18 /mo

2289.6 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~229 KB per page load
    Saves $0.18/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

87
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
89
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.

3.00 s

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

3.07 s

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

60 ms

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

0.080

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

3.00 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.

5.34 s

Desktop

97
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
98
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.

953 ms

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

953 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.

0.012

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

953 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.

953 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 83.5

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Cloud Load Balancing · 41 peers
You 84
·
Avg 76
+8 above average
0 50 100
Better than 90% of Google Cloud Load Balancing sites See full Google Cloud Load Balancing benchmark →
Google Font API · 1161 peers
You 84
·
Avg 74
+10 above average
0 50 100
Compliance P1Security P97Performance P94Content P88Accessibility P87Sustainability P84SEO P21Infrastructure P52

Top 10% of Google Font API sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 59 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 96% of Google Font API sites See full Google Font API benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Cloud Load Balancing, on Node.js, hosted on Express

10 technologies detected 3 stack layers 3 with CPE identifier Enterprise

Stack Architecture

Framework
Google Cloud Load Balancing Google Font API HSTS HTTP/3 Lucide Open Graph Tailwind CSS
Runtime
Node.js
Hosting
Express Google Cloud

All Detected Technologies (10)

Express is a web application framework for Node.js, released as free and open-source software under the MIT License. It is designed for building web applications and APIs.

Categories Web frameworks, Web servers Website https://expressjs.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence X-Powered-By: Express in redirect
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Google Cloud is a suite of cloud computing services.

Categories IaaS Website https://cloud.google.com Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Node.js is an open-source, cross-platform, JavaScript runtime environment that executes JavaScript code outside a web browser.

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

Google Cloud Load Balancing is a scalable, fully managed global load balancing service using Google Frontend.

Categories Load balancers Website https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing Detected by BeaverCheck

Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.

Categories Font scripts Website https://fonts.google.com/ Detected by BeaverCheck

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

HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://httpwg.org/ Detected by BeaverCheck

Lucide is an open-source icon library that provides 1000+ vector (svg) files for displaying icons and symbols in digital and non-digital projects.

Categories Font scripts Website https://lucide.dev Detected by BeaverCheck

Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://ogp.me Detected by BeaverCheck
Categories Framework Website https://tailwindcss.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Found 200 unique Tailwind utility classes in HTML

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Cloud Load Balancing) 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

10 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.

BeaverCheck badge

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fglobal-shayari-ai.ai.studio)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/ai.studio)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/ai.studio"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fglobal-shayari-ai.ai.studio" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fglobal-shayari-ai.ai.studio

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 · 13h total → projected A (91)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+5

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 1h → B (89)
  • · Cookie 'GAESA' is missing the Secure flag
  • · 1 button(s) with no accessible text
  • · Soft 404: server returns HTTP 200 for non-existent pages

Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements

+2

Higher effort, long-term payoff

2 findings 12h → A (91)
  • · 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
  • · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source

Send Feedback