Audit overview
3 categories need attention: Security, and 2 others.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
2High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
3High 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)
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything your users type — including credentials.
HSTS header is missing
Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.
No Content-Security-Policy header found
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.
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.
110 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing
High HTTP request count — bundling, sprite-ing, and HTTP/2 server push can reduce per-request overhead.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
AUD 1,128 investment → AUD 15,874/month returns + AUD 50,200,000 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
6 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~27%.
- Page takes 7.1s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 4.6s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 1.7sClicks 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
- No structured dataNo 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, …)
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
AUD 50,200,000
- 1 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedPrivacy Act 1988: AUD 66,000 – AUD 50,000,000
- 2 of 2 <nav> elements are unlabeledDDA: AUD 5,000 – AUD 200,000
- Multiple H1 headings (3 found)DDA: AUD 5,000 – AUD 200,000
Bounce-Rate Cost
AUD 9,279 /mo
+26.5pp bounce · ~2,651 lost visitors/mo
CPC: AUD 3.50
Bandwidth Waste
AUD 0.89 /mo
7225.9 MB/mo × 0.123 AUD/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~723 KB per page loadSaves AUD 0.89/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 3 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.
4.65 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
7.08 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
1.71 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.
8.39 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.
20.25 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
3.19 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.20 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
49 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.003
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
3.68 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.
5.87 s
Categories
8Performance
109 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Security
Content-Security-Policy 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.
Top 10% of Apple sites score 94+ on Infrastructure; you're at 81 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Top 10% of core-js sites score 94+ on Infrastructure; you're at 81 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Apple, with F5 BigIP CDN
Stack Architecture
Facebook Pixel 2.9.303
Google Analytics 
Google Tag Manager 
Marketo 165
Siteimprove 
StackAdapt 
TikTok Pixel 
Font Awesome 
Foundation 
Google Font API Google Search Console Microsoft Mimecast 
Open Graph 
Swiper ZURB Foundation 6.5.2
core-js 3.32.2
jQuery 3.7.1
F5 BigIP jsDelivr CDN All Detected Technologies (23)
F5's BIG-IP is a family of products covering software and hardware designed around application availability, access control, and security solutions.
Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.
Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Swiper is a JavaScript library that creates modern touch sliders with hardware-accelerated transitions.
Zurb Foundation is used to prototype in the browser. Allows rapid creation of websites or applications while leveraging mobile and responsive technology. The front end framework is the collection of HTML, CSS, and Javascript containing design patterns.
core-js is a modular standard library for JavaScript, with polyfills for cutting-edge ECMAScript features.
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.
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.
Marketo develops and sells marketing automation software for account-based marketing and other marketing services and products including SEO and content creation.
Siteimprove is a digital analytics and content QA platform.
StackAdapt is a platform that provides a content advertising strategy solution for planning, executing, and optimizing digital campaigns.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Apple) 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
23 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/acd3d76a-9599-401d-8f46-b34ce6578b5c)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/acd3d76a-9599-401d-8f46-b34ce6578b5c"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuow.edu.au" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fuow.edu.auExport & 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 · 10h total → projected B (81)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+4Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · HSTS header is missing
- · 109 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+4Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
- · No Content-Security-Policy header found
- · 110 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing