Skip to content
https://strictmx.com Export & share
Recent Trends
Performance stable →
100
TTFB degrading ↓
349ms
FCP stable →
1.0s
LCP stable →
1.2s
Scanned
2026-08-19 13:54 UTC
Worker
🇳🇱 Amsterdam
Duration
46.00s
Vs prev
no change

Global Performance

6/6 locations

High global latency — average 1053ms across 6 locations, fastest from New York (267ms), slowest from Singapore (3828ms). No CDN detected. Cache-Control header is missing. 4 locations above the 500ms target.

Netherlands - Amsterdam
Full audit
545ms
DNS 24ms · TLS 183ms
United Stated - New York
267ms
DNS 227ms · TLS 19ms
Spain - Madrid
360ms
DNS 45ms · TLS 109ms
United States - Santa Clara
527ms
DNS 331ms · TLS 69ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
791ms
DNS 391ms · TLS 140ms
Singapore - Singapore
3828ms
DNS 314ms · TLS 2200ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 1053ms · 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

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
Warning: 1

Unattributable: 348ms CPU time

Informational: CPU time spent on this resource. Total >1s is a perf budget violation.

Performance › JS Execution Cost
Warning: 2

https://strictmx.com/: 489ms CPU time

Informational: CPU time spent on this resource. Total >1s is a perf budget violation.

Performance › JS Execution Cost
Warning: 3

HTTP→HTTPS redirect uses 302 instead of 301

Infrastructure issues create a performance ceiling that no frontend optimization can overcome.

Infrastructure › URL Variants
Warning: 4

Registrar lock is NOT enabled

Without registrar lock, an attacker who phishes your registrar credentials can transfer the domain in minutes — total brand hijack.

Infrastructure › Domain Intelligence
Warning: 5

GDPR Article 13 disclosure coverage: 2 / 8 categories

Coverage of GDPR Article 13's eight required disclosure categories in the page body text. Lower coverage may mean the policy lives only on /privacy (not visible to this scan) or that disclosures are missing.

Compliance › GDPR Article 13 Disclosures
What fixing these means. Your site is in great shape. The remaining improvements are refinements rather than critical fixes. The 2 performance issues below shape how fast users perceive your page. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your conversion rate.
2 performance issues — Akamai's research found 53% of mobile users abandon pages over 3s.
2 infrastructure issues create a performance ceiling no frontend fix can overcome.
1 compliance gap under GDPR, CCPA, or ADA — direct legal exposure.

Business case

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

Return on investment

Return on Investment

Your site is healthy — fixing remaining items has minimal financial upside.

We surface the figures only when the projected returns clear a 1% noise floor of the investment, so we don't print a misleading ROI when the audit is essentially clean. The sections below still list the specific findings if you want to chase the last few points.

Conversion barriers

No conversion barriers detected.

Barriers
0
Bounce delta
+0pp
added vs baseline
Score
100
A+
Speed
0
Trust
0
Usability
0
Content
0
Nav
0

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

Remediation cost

€487 6.1 developer hours at €80/hr
Quick wins
€7 1 fixes in ~5 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

€0,03 / month at risk ~€0,32 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Bandwidth Waste

€0,03 /mo

365.3 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~37 KB per page load
    Saves €0,03/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
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

100
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
91
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.
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.

989 ms

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

1.21 s

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

36 ms

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

0.010

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

1.39 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.

1.22 s

Desktop

100
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
91
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.
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.

337 ms

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

371 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.

0.008

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

585 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.

371 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 92.4

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Search Console · 4127 peers
You 93
·
Avg 74
+19 above average
0 50 100
SEO P99Accessibility P98Security P97Content P97Performance P96Sustainability P92Compliance P14Infrastructure P73

Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 70 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 97% of Google Search Console sites See full Google Search Console benchmark →
HSTS · 2853 peers
You 93
·
Avg 76
+17 above average
0 50 100
SEO P99Security P96Accessibility P96Content P96Performance P94Sustainability P89Compliance P19Infrastructure P71

Top 10% of HSTS sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 70 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 96% of HSTS sites See full HSTS benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Search Console, hosted on OVH

5 technologies detected 2 stack layers Standard

Stack Architecture

Framework
Google Search Console HSTS HTTP/3 Open Graph
Hosting
OVH

All Detected Technologies (5)

Categories Hosting Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence NS record: ns109.ovh.net
Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: google-site-verification=XnfXKJGe7_KAGVfLvHrR_uwehUqda4WrxD0oxaTciY0

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

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

Observations (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Search Console) 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%2Fstrictmx.com)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/strictmx.com)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/strictmx.com"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstrictmx.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstrictmx.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

3 sprints · 6h total → projected A (95)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+2

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 0h → A (95)
  • · Unattributable: 348ms CPU time
  • · https://strictmx.com/: 489ms CPU time
  • · Registrar lock is NOT enabled

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

Medium effort, high structural impact

1 findings 2h → A (95)
  • · GDPR Article 13 disclosure coverage: 2 / 8 categories

Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements

Higher effort, long-term payoff

1 findings 4h → A (95)
  • · HTTP→HTTPS redirect uses 302 instead of 301

Send Feedback