Audit overview
Accessibility needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
4High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
1High 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)
HSTS header is missing
Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.
23 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.
4 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.
6 image(s) missing alt attribute
Each image without alt text is a WCAG 1.1.1 failure — invisible to screen-reader users, lost from Google Image Search.
6 image-in-link without alt text
Image-only links with no alt create empty links — screen-reader users hear 'link' with no destination context.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
€260 investment → €13,158/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
7 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~35%.
- Page takes 8.7s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 6.2s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- No viewport meta tagMobile browsers render at desktop width and shrink — text unreadable, tap targets miniature→ Add <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
- 31 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 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 detectedRGPD: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundRGPD: EUR 5.000 – EUR 10.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundRGPD: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
€7.795 /mo
+35.4pp bounce · ~3,543 lost visitors/mo
CPC: EUR 2.20
Bandwidth Waste
€0,49 /mo
6569.7 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~657 KB per page loadSaves €0,49/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.
7.58 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
8.70 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
128 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.008
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
7.58 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.
12.82 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
2.31 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.68 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.
0.000
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
2.57 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.
2.68 s
Categories
8Performance
All checks pass
Security
HSTS header is missing
Accessibility
23 button(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 Font Awesome sites score 72+ on Accessibility; you're at 40 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 71+ on Accessibility; you're at 40 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Font Awesome 6.5.2, on Node.js, with Cloudflare CDN
Stack Architecture
Passport.js 
Font Awesome 6.5.2Google Search Console Google Workspace 
HTTP/3 
Hammer.js 2.0.8
Howler.js 
Open Graph 
Quill 
jQuery 3.7.1
jQuery UI 1.14.0
Node.js 
Cloudflare 
cdnjs All Detected Technologies (14)
Cloudflare is a web-infrastructure and website-security company, providing content-delivery-network services, DDoS mitigation, Internet security, and distributed domain-name-server services.
cdnjs is a free distributed JS library delivery service.
Node.js is an open-source, cross-platform, JavaScript runtime environment that executes JavaScript code outside a web browser.
Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.
HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.
Hammer.js is a JavaScript library for adding touch gestures like swipe, pinch, and rotate to web applications.
Howler.js is an audio library with support for the Web Audio API and a fallback mechanism for HTML5 Audio.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Quill is a free open-source WYSIWYG editor.
jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.
jQuery UI is a collection of GUI widgets, animated visual effects, and themes implemented with jQuery, Cascading Style Sheets, and HTML.
Passport.js is an authentication middleware for Node.js, supporting various strategies to enable user authentication in web applications.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Font Awesome) 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
14 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/492e6cb6-51f7-4cb4-bb5f-516967e8d7b1)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/492e6cb6-51f7-4cb4-bb5f-516967e8d7b1"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewgrounds.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnewgrounds.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 · 3h total → projected B (81)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+6Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · HSTS header is missing
- · 23 button(s) with no accessible text
- · 4 link(s) with no accessible text
- · 6 image-in-link without alt text
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · 6 image(s) missing alt attribute