Audit overview
Security and Accessibility need attention; the other categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
2High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
3High 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)
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything your users type — including credentials.
No Content-Security-Policy header found
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.
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.
49 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.
Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing
COEP enforces that all embedded resources opt-in to cross-origin embedding — required for cross-origin isolation features.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
NOK 6,750 investment → NOK 76,242/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 ~22%.
- Severe layout shift during page loadUsers mis-click when content jumps — converting intent into frustration→ Reserve space for images, ads, and embeds with explicit width/height
- Page loads in 3.7sEvery additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 1.2s over→ Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
- No HSTS headerReturning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request→ Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
- 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
- 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 detectedGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundGDPR: EUR 5.000 – EUR 10.000.000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundGDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
NOK 55.632 /mo
+22.3pp bounce · ~2,225 lost visitors/mo
CPC: NOK 25.00
Bandwidth Waste
NOK 2,27 /mo
2634.7 MB/mo × 0.860 NOK/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~263 KB per page loadSaves NOK 2,27/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 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
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.
3.23 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.68 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.
0.355
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
3.23 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.
3.88 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
837 ms
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
966 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.
0.036
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
837 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.
967 ms
Categories
8Performance
49 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Security
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Accessibility
1 link(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 Apple sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 73 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 73 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Apple, with Nginx CDN
Stack Architecture
Google Analytics 
Google Tag Manager 
Modernizr 3.6.0
Open Graph 
Varnish 
jQuery 3.6.0 jQuery Migrate 3.3.2
jQuery UI 1.13.2
Nginx All Detected Technologies (14)
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Modernizr is a JavaScript library that detects the features available in a user's browser.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Varnish is a reverse caching proxy.
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.
Query Migrate is a javascript library that allows you to preserve the compatibility of your jQuery code developed for versions of jQuery older than 1.9.
jQuery UI is a collection of GUI widgets, animated visual effects, and themes implemented with jQuery, Cascading Style Sheets, and HTML.
Google Analytics is a free web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.
Google Tag Manager is a tag management system (TMS) that allows you to quickly and easily update measurement codes and related code fragments collectively known as tags on your website or mobile app.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Apple) 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/sites/uio.no)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/uio.no"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuio.no" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuio.noExport & 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 · 8h total → projected B (85)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+3Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 1 link(s) with no accessible text
- · 49 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+5Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
- · No Content-Security-Policy header found
- · Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing