Skip to content
https://www.theguardian.com Export & share
Recent Trends
Performance stable →
49
TTFB stable →
11ms
FCP stable →
4.9s
LCP stable →
8.0s
Scanned
2026-05-09 07:34 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
56.00s
Vs prev
Improved by +4

Global Performance

6/6 locations

Excellent global latency — average 14ms across 6 locations, fastest from Singapore (10ms), slowest from Madrid (27ms). No CDN detected.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
27ms
DNS 24ms · TLS 2ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
13ms
DNS 4ms · TLS 6ms
United States - Santa Clara
13ms
DNS 6ms · TLS 4ms
United Stated - New York
10ms
DNS 3ms · TLS 4ms
Singapore - Singapore
10ms
DNS 3ms · TLS 3ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
13ms
DNS 5ms · TLS 4ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 14ms · Cache: max-age=0

Audit overview

Compliance and Content need attention; the other 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

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 'gu_client_ab_tests' 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

Cookie 'gu_v2_mvt_id' 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: 5

No H1 heading found

No H1 means screen-reader users can't identify the page's primary topic, and Google's content-extraction degrades.

Accessibility › Heading Hierarchy
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.
4 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
1 accessibility issue excludes 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

€1,077 investment → €5,831/month returns + EUR 120,500,000 risk avoided

Investment
€1,077
12.7 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
€5,831
€69,971/yr
Payback
0.2 mo
+6399% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided EUR 120,500,000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
€1,0410.2 mo payback · +6620% 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.
€57 — 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

6 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~30%.

Barriers
6
3 crit 3 warn
Bounce delta
+30pp
added vs baseline
Score
61
C
Speed
2
Trust
1
Usability
0
Content
2
Nav
1
  • Page takes 4.3s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 1.8s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • Page feels frozen for 619ms
    Clicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs
    → Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
  • 4 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 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
  • No Open Graph tags
    Links shared on LinkedIn / Slack / Facebook show bare URLs — referral clicks drop
    → Add og:title, og:description, og:image, og:url to the page head

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

Remediation cost

€1,077 12.7 developer hours at €85/hr
Quick wins
€57 3 fixes in ~40 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

Cost of inaction

€10,044,854 / month at risk ~€120,538,246 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

€120,500,000

ePrivacy DirectiveGDPREAA
  • 4 non-essential cookie(s) set without consent banner
    GDPR: EUR 5,000 – EUR 10,000,000
  • 4 non-essential cookie(s) set without consent banner
    GDPR: EUR 10,000 – EUR 20,000,000
  • 4 non-essential cookie(s) set without consent banner
    ePrivacy Directive: EUR 5,000 – EUR 100,000,000
  • No H1 heading found
    EAA: EUR 1,000 – EUR 500,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

€3,187 /mo

+29.7pp bounce · ~2,967 lost visitors/mo

CPC: EUR 1.07

Bandwidth Waste

€0.25 /mo

3325.2 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~333 KB per page load
    Saves €0.25/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

65
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
93
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.
77
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.

2.72 s

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

4.29 s

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

619 ms

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

0.009

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

2.72 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.

8.64 s

Desktop

99
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
97
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.
77
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.

672 ms

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

851 ms

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

4 ms

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

0.001

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

779 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.

1.78 s

Categories

8
Avg score 79.5

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Cart Functionality · 539 peers
You 82
·
Avg 73
+9 above average
0 50 100
Accessibility P98Content P3Compliance P5Performance P94Security P92Sustainability P82Infrastructure P65SEO P48

Top 10% of Cart Functionality sites score 95+ on Content; you're at 59 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 96% of Cart Functionality sites See full Cart Functionality benchmark →
core-js · 1560 peers
You 82
·
Avg 72
+10 above average
0 50 100
Accessibility P99Content P2Compliance P3Security P96Performance P95Sustainability P86Infrastructure P64SEO P49

Top 10% of core-js sites score 95+ on Content; you're at 59 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 98% of core-js sites See full core-js benchmark →

Technology stack

HSTS, on Emotion

8 technologies detected 4 stack layers Complex

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Adjust
Ecommerce
Cart Functionality
Framework
HSTS HTTP/3 Polyfill 3 RSS core-js 3.10.2
Runtime
Emotion

All Detected Technologies (8)

Emotion is a library designed for writing CSS styles with JavaScript.

Categories JavaScript frameworks, Development Website https://emotion.sh Detected by BeaverCheck

Websites that have a shopping cart or checkout page, either using a known ecommerce platform or a custom solution.

Categories Ecommerce Website https://www.wappalyzer.com/technologies/ecommerce/cart-functionality 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

Polyfill is a service which accepts a request for a set of browser features and returns only the polyfills that are needed by the requesting browser.

Categories JavaScript libraries Website https://polyfill.io Detected by BeaverCheck

RSS is a family of web feed formats used to publish frequently updated works—such as blog entries, news headlines, audio, and video—in a standardized format.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification Detected by BeaverCheck

core-js is a modular standard library for JavaScript, with polyfills for cutting-edge ECMAScript features.

Categories JavaScript libraries Website https://github.com/zloirock/core-js Detected by BeaverCheck

Adjust is the mobile marketing analytics platform.

Categories Analytics Website https://www.adjust.com Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (HSTS) 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

8 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%2Fwww.theguardian.com)](https://beavercheck.com/results/580dbd7f-a1cd-44d1-baa1-1a65df2f894c)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/580dbd7f-a1cd-44d1-baa1-1a65df2f894c"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.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 · 13h total → projected B (89)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+6

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 1h → B (88)
  • · No H1 heading found
  • · Cookie 'gu_client_ab_tests' is missing the Secure flag
  • · Cookie 'gu_v2_mvt_id' is missing the Secure flag

Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements

+1

Higher effort, long-term payoff

2 findings 12h → B (89)
  • · 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
  • · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source

Send Feedback