Skip to content
https://poste.it Export & share
IT · EUR (€) · Estimated Applicable regulations: GDPR · ePrivacy Directive · EAA Dev cost: €55/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-05-26 12:05 UTC
Worker
🇸🇬 Singapore
Duration
3.0m
Vs prev

Global Performance

6/6 locations

Strong global performance — average 103ms across 6 locations, fastest from Singapore (20ms), slowest from Santa Clara (212ms). Azure CDN edge cache (CONFIG_NOCACHE). Cache-Control header is missing.

Singapore - Singapore
Full audit
20ms
DNS 5ms · TLS 8ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
45ms
DNS 10ms · TLS 9ms
United States - Santa Clara
212ms
DNS 192ms · TLS 9ms
United Stated - New York
38ms
DNS 11ms · TLS 15ms
Spain - Madrid
156ms
DNS 22ms · TLS 38ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
145ms
DNS 113ms · TLS 10ms
CDN: Azure CDN (CONFIG_NOCACHE) · Avg TTFB: 103ms · Cache: No cache headers

Audit overview

All categories sit comfortably above the 70 threshold; this is a clean audit.

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
Warning: 5

109 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.

Performance › Page Weight Inventory
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 13.8s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 1 performance issue below directly contributes to it. 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.
1 accessibility issue excludes users who rely on assistive technology.
Your LCP is 13.8s — fixing the 1 performance critical could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.

Business case

What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.

Return on investment

€399 investment → €3,827/month returns + EUR 500,000 risk avoided

Investment
€399
7.3 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
€3.827
€45.927/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+11418% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided EUR 500.000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
€3440.1 mo payback · +13261% 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.
€14 — 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

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

Barriers
7
1 crit 6 warn
Bounce delta
+26pp
added vs baseline
Score
72
B
Speed
2
Trust
2
Usability
2
Content
0
Nav
1
  • Page takes 13.8s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 11.3s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • High main-thread blocking time
    Page is non-interactive for 353ms after first paint
    → Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
  • 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

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

Remediation cost

€399 7.3 developer hours at €55/hr
Quick wins
€14 1 fixes in ~15 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

€2.792 / month at risk ~€33.501 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

€500.000

EAA
  • 2 of 4 <nav> elements are unlabeled
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
  • Skip navigation link is missing (WCAG 2.4.1)
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
  • Multiple H1 headings (4 found)
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000

Bounce-Rate Cost

€2.791 /mo

+26.0pp bounce · ~2,598 lost visitors/mo

CPC: EUR 1.07

Bandwidth Waste

€0,83 /mo

11256.9 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~1.1 MB per page load
    Saves €0,83/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 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

Bounce-rate model & assumptions

Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers

Lighthouse

Mobile

43
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.
96
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
92
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.

3.64 s

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

13.76 s

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

353 ms

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

0.158

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

15.92 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.

17.68 s

Desktop

60
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.
96
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
92
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.

550 ms

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

2.42 s

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

7 ms

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

0.341

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

9.68 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.

3.01 s

Categories

8
Avg score 79.6

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Cart Functionality · 550 peers
You 80
·
Avg 73
+7 above average
0 50 100
Accessibility P95Security P90Compliance P13Infrastructure P14Performance P78SEO P73Sustainability P55Content P47

Top 10% of Cart Functionality sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 71 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 92% of Cart Functionality sites See full Cart Functionality benchmark →
Azure Front Door · 32 peers
You 80
·
Avg 74
+6 above average
0 50 100
Better than 81% of Azure Front Door sites See full Azure Front Door benchmark →

Technology stack

Azure Front Door, hosted on Azure, with Azure CDN CDN

14 technologies detected 5 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Enterprise

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Adobe Analytics Adobe Experience Platform Launch
Ecommerce
Cart Functionality
Framework
Azure Front Door Bootstrap 3.4.1Facebook Google Search Console Open Graph Priority Hints ServiceNow Tailwind CSS jQuery 3.7.1
CDN
Azure CDN
Hosting
Azure

All Detected Technologies (14)

Categories CDN Website https://azure.microsoft.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence x-azure-ref: 20260526T120233Z-1679658c9465sxtrhC1SG1gpys00000004m0000000008k5e

Azure is a cloud computing service for building, testing, deploying, and managing applications and services through Microsoft-managed data centers.

Categories PaaS Website https://azure.microsoft.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Header: x-azure-ref

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

Azure Front Door is a scalable and secure entry point for fast delivery of your global web applications.

Categories Load balancers Website https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/frontdoor/ Detected by BeaverCheck

Bootstrap is a free and open-source CSS framework directed at responsive, mobile-first front-end web development. It contains CSS and JavaScript-based design templates for typography, forms, buttons, navigation, and other interface components.

Categories UI frameworks Website https://getbootstrap.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Stylesheet: ../assets-da/vendor/bootstrap/css/bootstrap.min.css
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →
Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: facebook-domain-verification=ds9l5q6cokzq07688egpnfffvf3f2x
Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: google-site-verification=6KyMes3V4K4XE4mC1SXkOVwclSwW-jLxJHXakjz1nkA

Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://ogp.me Detected by BeaverCheck

Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.

Categories Performance Website https://wicg.github.io/priority-hints/ Detected by BeaverCheck

ServiceNow is a cloud computing platform to help companies manage digital workflows for enterprise operations.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://www.servicenow.com Detected by BeaverCheck
Categories Framework Website https://tailwindcss.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Found 49 unique Tailwind utility classes in HTML

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.

Categories JavaScript libraries Website https://jquery.com Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Adobe Analytics is a web analytics, marketing and cross-channel analytics application.

Categories Analytics Website https://www.adobe.com/analytics/adobe-analytics.html Detected by BeaverCheck

Adobe Experience Cloud Launch is an extendable tag management solution for Adobe Experience Cloud, Adobe Experience Platform, and other applications.

Categories Tag managers Website https://docs.adobelaunch.com/getting-started Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (3)

No build tool detected

A framework (Azure Front Door) 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.

Bootstrap version may be outdated

Detected Bootstrap 3.4.1. The current major version is 5. Consider updating for security patches and new features.

→ Security

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.

BeaverCheck badge

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fposte.it)](https://beavercheck.com/results/63d4e3a3-a149-4ab4-a641-f384c237eb70)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/63d4e3a3-a149-4ab4-a641-f384c237eb70"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fposte.it" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fposte.it

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 · 7h total → projected B (88)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+3

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → B (83)
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · 109 third-party resources (100% of weight)

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+5

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 7h → B (88)
  • · 1 control(s) without accessible label
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found

Send Feedback