Audit overview
All categories sit comfortably above the 70 threshold; this is a clean audit.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
3High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
2High 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)
'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.
'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.
10 image-only link(s) without alt text
Image-only links with no alt are unidentifiable to screen-reader users — link's destination is invisible.
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.
44 third-party resources (81% of weight)
Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
£975 investment → £10,124/month returns + GBP 18,050,000 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 ~30%.
- Page takes 6.4s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 3.9s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 2.3sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- 3 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 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
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
£18,050,000
- No privacy policy link detectedUK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
- 1 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedUK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundUK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
Bounce-Rate Cost
£6,371 /mo
+30.3pp bounce · ~3,034 lost visitors/mo
CPC: GBP 2.10
Bandwidth Waste
£0.35 /mo
5552.4 MB/mo × 0.063 GBP/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~555 KB per page loadSaves £0.35/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 4 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.
3.54 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
6.38 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
2.34 s
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.053
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
4.45 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.
15.99 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.26 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.19 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
286 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.049
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
1.67 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.
4.22 s
Categories
8Performance
44 third-party resources (81% of weight)
Security
'unsafe-eval' found in script source
Accessibility
10 image-only link(s) without alt 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 Bulma sites score 97+ on Content; you're at 83 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Bulma, with Cloudinary CDN
Stack Architecture
Google Tag Manager 
Linkedin Ads Linkedin Insight Tag 
Bulma 
GetFeedback Google Search Console HSTS 
LazySizes 
Open Graph 
Tailwind CSS 
Ubuntu 
X-Clacks-Overhead 
Cloudinary 
Nginx 1.14.0All Detected Technologies (14)
Cloudinary is an end-to-end image- and video-management solution for websites and mobile apps, covering everything from image and video uploads, storage, manipulations, optimisations to delivery.
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
GetFeedback (formerly Usabilla) is a user feedback solution for collecting qualitative and quantitative user feedback across digital channels including websites, apps and emails.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
LazySizes is a JavaScript library used to delay the loading of images (iframes, scripts, etc) until they come into view.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Ubuntu is a free and open-source operating system on Linux for the enterprise server, desktop, cloud, and IoT.
X-Clacks-Overhead is a non-standard HTTP header used to transmit tribute messages within server responses.
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.
Linkedin Ads is a paid marketing tool that offers access to Linkedin social networks through various sponsored posts and other methods.
LinkedIn Insight Tag is a lightweight JavaScript tag that powers conversion tracking, website audiences, and website demographics.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Bulma) 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/5ba137d6-1084-4bad-b51c-73fb89a06d4c)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/5ba137d6-1084-4bad-b51c-73fb89a06d4c"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fubuntu.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fubuntu.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 · 13h total → projected B (87)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+4Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 10 image-only link(s) without alt text
- · 2 link(s) with no accessible text
- · 44 third-party resources (81% of weight)
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+5Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source