Skip to content
RU · RUB (₽) · Estimated Dev cost: ₽3,500/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-04-22 23:59 UTC
Worker
🇺🇸 New York
Duration
38.00s
Vs prev

Audit overview

3 categories need attention: Accessibility, and 2 others.

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

No <main> landmark found

Without a <main> landmark, screen-reader users can't skip past the navigation to the page content — every page starts with re-reading the menu.

Accessibility › Landmark Structure
Warning: 5

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.

Security › Security Headers
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology — an estimated 15% of your potential audience. 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

₽25,958 investment → ₽85,042/month returns

Investment
₽25 958
7.4 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
₽85 042
₽1 020 500/yr
Payback
0.3 mo
+3831% Y1
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
₽21 8750.3 mo payback · +4565% 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.
₽1 458 — 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 ~14%.

Barriers
6
6 warn
Bounce delta
+14pp
added vs baseline
Score
82
B
Speed
0
Trust
2
Usability
0
Content
3
Nav
1
  • 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
  • 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
  • No structured data
    No rich-result eligibility in Google — lower SERP CTR vs competitors with stars and prices
    → Add JSON-LD for your page type (Product, Article, FAQPage, LocalBusiness, …)
  • Thin content
    Under 300 words — visitors bounce looking for substance, search engines rank competitors first
    → Add a substantive FAQ, product detail, or case-study section

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

Remediation cost

₽25,958 7.4 developer hours at ₽3500/hr
Quick wins
₽1,458 2 fixes in ~25 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

₽85 042 / month at risk ~₽1 020 500 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Bounce-Rate Cost

₽85 041 /mo

+14.2pp bounce · ~1,417 lost visitors/mo

CPC: RUB 60.00

Bandwidth Waste

₽1,08 /mo

149.1 MB/mo × 7.273 RUB/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~15 KB per page load
    Saves ₽1,08/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

100
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
77
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.
91
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.

761 ms

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

761 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.

0.000

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

1.18 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.

761 ms

Desktop

100
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
77
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.
91
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.

204 ms

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

204 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.

0.000

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

380 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.

204 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 76.4

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Search Console · 3872 peers
You 77
·
Avg 73
At average
0 50 100
Performance P99Compliance P3Content P10SEO P11Sustainability P87Accessibility P25Security P68Infrastructure P62

Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 65 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 77% of Google Search Console sites See full Google Search Console benchmark →
Nginx · 987 peers
You 77
·
Avg 74
At average
0 50 100
Performance P99SEO P3Compliance P5Content P14Sustainability P84Accessibility P28Security P69Infrastructure P63

Top 10% of Nginx sites score 97+ on SEO; you're at 74 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 70% of Nginx sites See full Nginx benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Search Console, with Nginx CDN

2 technologies detected 2 stack layers 1 with CPE identifier Minimal

Stack Architecture

Framework
Google Search Console
CDN
Nginx

All Detected Technologies (2)

Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.

Categories Web servers, Reverse proxies Website https://nginx.org/en Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Server header: nginx
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →
Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: google-site-verification=MXJzTpNyPWMLnUJR-qEesyBGYH9mQRvKysccT78Xt-g

Observations (2)

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.

Minimal technology footprint

Only 2 technologies detected. This suggests a simple setup with minimal dependencies — excellent for performance and security.

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%2Fregnum.ru)](https://beavercheck.com/results/89985bbf-debc-40ab-bba3-b8f6dcb16442)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/89985bbf-debc-40ab-bba3-b8f6dcb16442"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregnum.ru" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregnum.ru

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 (86)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → B (81)
  • · No <main> landmark found
  • · HSTS header is missing

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+5

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 7h → B (86)
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found
  • · Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing

Send Feedback