Skip to content
Scanned
2026-04-22 20:40 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
47.00s
Vs prev

Audit overview

Security needs attention; the rest of the 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

HSTS header is missing

Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.

Security › Security Headers
Critical: 3

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: 4

1 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.

Accessibility › Alt Text Quality
Critical: 5

1 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.

Accessibility › Link & Button Quality
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

$825 investment → $12,647/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided

Investment
$825
8.3 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
$12,647
$151,760/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+18295% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided USD 157,500
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
$6250.0 mo payback · +24182% 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.
$75 — 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

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

Barriers
7
3 crit 4 warn
Bounce delta
+32pp
added vs baseline
Score
58
C
Speed
1
Trust
3
Usability
0
Content
1
Nav
2
  • Page takes 5.5s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 3.0s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • Mixed content on HTTPS page
    Browsers block insecure subresources — broken images, missing scripts, warning badge
    → Change http:// URLs inside the page to https:// (or protocol-relative)
  • 5 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
  • 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

$825 8.3 developer hours at $100/hr
Quick wins
$75 2 fixes in ~45 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

$8,502 / month at risk ~$102,025 / 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
  • Trackers detected but no cookie policy found
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • Trackers detected but no privacy policy found
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500

Bounce-Rate Cost

$8,502 /mo

+31.6pp bounce · ~3,161 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 2.69

Bandwidth Waste

$0.07 /mo

848.0 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~85 KB per page load
    Saves $0.07/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

74
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
79
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
77
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.

3.02 s

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

5.50 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.

3.24 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.

5.50 s

Desktop

85
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
78
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.

1.23 s

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

2.06 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.

1.63 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.

2.06 s

Categories

8
Avg score 79.1

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Font API · 1049 peers
You 77
·
Avg 74
At average
0 50 100
Infrastructure P6Performance P94Sustainability P88Security P14Accessibility P86Compliance P22Content P24SEO P36

Top 10% of Google Font API sites score 96+ on Infrastructure; you're at 79 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 75% of Google Font API sites See full Google Font API benchmark →
jQuery · 1925 peers
You 77
·
Avg 73
At average
0 50 100
Performance P95Infrastructure P7Accessibility P89Sustainability P89Security P13Compliance P21Content P31SEO P34

Top 10% of jQuery sites score 95+ on Infrastructure; you're at 79 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 76% of jQuery sites See full jQuery benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Font API, with F5 BigIP CDN

10 technologies detected 3 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Enterprise

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Google Analytics
Framework
Google Font API Microsoft Modernizr 2.8.3NS1 Open Graph Proofpoint ZURB Foundation 5.5.2 jQuery 2.1.1
CDN
F5 BigIP

All Detected Technologies (10)

F5's BIG-IP is a family of products covering software and hardware designed around application availability, access control, and security solutions.

Categories Reverse proxies Website https://www.f5.com/products/big-ip-services Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

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
Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Low Evidence TXT record: MS=ms93160748

Modernizr is a JavaScript library that detects the features available in a user's browser.

Categories JavaScript libraries Website https://modernizr.com Detected by BeaverCheck
Categories DNS Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence NS record: dns1.p01.nsone.net

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 Email Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence MX record: mx0b-00137801.pphosted.com

Zurb Foundation is used to prototype in the browser. Allows rapid creation of websites or applications while leveraging mobile and responsive technology. The front end framework is the collection of HTML, CSS, and Javascript containing design patterns.

Categories UI frameworks Website https://foundation.zurb.com Detected by BeaverCheck

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.

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

Google Analytics is a free web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.

Categories Analytics Website https://google.com/analytics Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (3)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Font API) 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.

jQuery version may be outdated

Detected jQuery 2.1.1. The current major version is 3. Consider updating for security patches and new features.

→ Security

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

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 B (86)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 1h → B (81)
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · 1 link(s) with no accessible text

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+5

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 8h → B (86)
  • · 1 image(s) missing alt attribute
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found

Send Feedback