Audit overview
Accessibility needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.
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)
HSTS header is missing
Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.
115 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.
116 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing
High HTTP request count — bundling, sprite-ing, and HTTP/2 server push can reduce per-request overhead.
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.
Cross-Origin-Opener-Policy header is missing
COOP isolates your top-level browsing context from cross-origin windows — without it, popup-based side-channel attacks remain possible.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
$550 investment → $9,548/month returns + USD 157,500 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
5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~26%.
- Page takes 5.1s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 2.6s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 3.8sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- 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
- 2 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
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
$157,500
- No privacy policy link detectedCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- 5 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
Bounce-Rate Cost
$7,061 /mo
+26.3pp bounce · ~2,625 lost visitors/mo
CPC: USD 2.69
Bandwidth Waste
$0.53 /mo
6615.4 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~662 KB per page loadSaves $0.53/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 1 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.
3.43 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
5.08 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
3.76 s
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.
4.06 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.
19.44 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.02 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
1.13 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
371 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.
1.07 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.
4.65 s
Categories
8Performance
115 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Security
HSTS header is missing
Accessibility
All checks pass
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.
Technology stack
Craft CMS, with Imgix CDN
Stack Architecture
AppNexus 
DoubleClick Floodlight 
Facebook Pixel 2.9.303
Google Analytics 
Google Tag Manager 
Microsoft Advertising 
StackAdapt 
theTradeDesk 
Adobe Fonts 
Alpine.js 3.14.3Amazon Route 53 Facebook SDK Google Search Console Hotjar Microsoft 365 
Open Graph 
Tailwind CSS 
Webpack 
core-js 3.32.2
Imgix 
Nginx All Detected Technologies (22)
Imgix is a visual media platform for managing, processing, rendering, optimising and delivering your existing images.
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
Adobe Fonts is a web-based service providing access to a vast library of high-quality fonts for web and print design.
Alpine.js is a minimal framework for composing behavior directly in your markup.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Webpack is an open-source JavaScript module bundler.
core-js is a modular standard library for JavaScript, with polyfills for cutting-edge ECMAScript features.
AppNexus is a cloud-based software platform that enables and optimizes programmatic online advertising.
Facebook pixel is an analytics tool that allows you to measure the effectiveness of your advertising.
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.
Microsoft Advertising is an online advertising platform developed by Microsoft.
StackAdapt is a platform that provides a content advertising strategy solution for planning, executing, and optimizing digital campaigns.
theTradeDesk is an technology company that markets a software platform used by digital ad buyers to purchase data-driven digital advertising campaigns across various ad formats and devices.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Adobe Fonts) 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
22 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/5e7449f4-8783-4915-97c5-514a62d7fff1)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/5e7449f4-8783-4915-97c5-514a62d7fff1"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhrc.org" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhrc.orgExport & 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 · 6h total → projected B (81)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+4Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · HSTS header is missing
- · 115 third-party resources (100% of weight)
- · Cross-Origin-Opener-Policy header is missing
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing
- · 116 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing