Skip to content
Scanned
2026-04-22 21:19 UTC
Worker
🇺🇸 New York
Duration
39.00s
Vs prev

Audit overview

Accessibility and Content need attention; the other 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 control(s) without accessible label

Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.

Accessibility › Form Accessibility
Critical: 5

2 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. Accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology — an estimated 15% of your potential audience. 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

€698 investment → €6,054/month returns + EUR 500,000 risk avoided

Investment
€698
7.8 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
€6.054
€72.643/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+10315% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided EUR 500.000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
€5630.1 mo payback · +12814% 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.
€68 — 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

10 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~26%.

Barriers
10
10 warn
Bounce delta
+26pp
added vs baseline
Score
70
B
Speed
1
Trust
2
Usability
2
Content
3
Nav
2
  • Page loads in 2.8s
    Every additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 257ms over
    → Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
  • 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
  • Layout shifts during page load
    Content movement causes mis-clicks on CTAs and form fields
    → Add width/height to images; reserve space for late-loading embeds
  • 1 form field(s) without a label
    Screen 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

€698 7.8 developer hours at €90/hr
Quick wins
€68 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

€5.658 / month at risk ~€67.892 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

€500.000

EAA
  • No <main> landmark found
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
  • No <nav> landmark found
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
  • Skip navigation link is missing (WCAG 2.4.1)
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000

Bounce-Rate Cost

€5.658 /mo

+25.7pp bounce · ~2,572 lost visitors/mo

CPC: EUR 2.20

Bandwidth Waste

€0,04 /mo

502.4 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~50 KB per page load
    Saves €0,04/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

82
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
82
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
96
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.

2.01 s

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

2.76 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.

0.238

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

2.01 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.

2.76 s

Desktop

98
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
61
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.

787 ms

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

907 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.

0.000

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

787 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.

907 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 77.1

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Microsoft 365 · 2421 peers
You 76
·
Avg 72
At average
0 50 100
Performance P97Content P7Sustainability P91Accessibility P12Compliance P86Infrastructure P21Security P76SEO P25

Top 10% of Microsoft 365 sites score 95+ on Content; you're at 67 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 77% of Microsoft 365 sites See full Microsoft 365 benchmark →
Pure CSS · 7 peers
You 76
·
Avg 74
At average
0 50 100
Better than 57% of Pure CSS sites See full Pure CSS benchmark →

Technology stack

Microsoft 365, on Apache, hosted on Apache HTTP Server

5 technologies detected 3 stack layers 1 with CPE identifier Standard

Stack Architecture

Framework
Microsoft 365 Pure CSS
Server
Apache
Hosting
Apache HTTP Server GoDaddy

All Detected Technologies (5)

Categories Server Website https://httpd.apache.org Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Server header: Apache

Apache is a free and open-source cross-platform web server software.

Categories Web servers Website https://httpd.apache.org/ Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →
Categories Hosting Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence NS record: ns35.domaincontrol.com
Categories Email Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence MX record: irfanview-com.mail.protection.outlook.com

Pure CSS is a set of small, responsive CSS modules that can be used in web projects.

Categories UI frameworks Website https://purecss.io Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (Microsoft 365) 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.

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%2Firfanview.com)](https://beavercheck.com/results/55d08481-c3d8-403f-bbd2-ad8b94f9d95c)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/55d08481-c3d8-403f-bbd2-ad8b94f9d95c"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Firfanview.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Firfanview.com

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 (85)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 1h → B (80)
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · 2 link(s) with no accessible text

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+5

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 7h → B (85)
  • · 1 control(s) without accessible label
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found

Send Feedback