Audit overview
All categories sit comfortably above the 70 threshold; this is a clean audit.
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)
'unsafe-eval' found in script source
Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.
25 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.
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
£994 investment → £6,638/month returns + GBP 17,550,000 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
5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~23%.
- Page takes 11.4s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 8.9s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- High main-thread blocking timePage is non-interactive for 262ms after first paint→ Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
- 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, …)
- Content is hard to readGraduate-level reading difficulty — limits the addressable audience for product or blog pages→ Shorten sentences; replace jargon with plain language; target Flesch ease ≥60
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
£17,550,000
- No privacy policy link detectedUK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
- Privacy Policy not detectedUK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
- No <nav> landmark foundEquality Act 2010: GBP 500 – GBP 50,000
Bounce-Rate Cost
£4,926 /mo
+23.5pp bounce · ~2,346 lost visitors/mo
CPC: GBP 2.10
Bandwidth Waste
£0.35 /mo
5489.8 MB/mo × 0.063 GBP/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~549 KB per page loadSaves £0.35/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 2 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.
4.38 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
11.42 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
262 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.
4.38 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.
11.42 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.39 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.50 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
9 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.029
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.
2.50 s
Categories
8Performance
25 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Security
'unsafe-eval' found in script source
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 WordPress sites score 99+ on Infrastructure; you're at 84 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
WordPress, with Nginx CDN
Stack Architecture
WordPress 
Cookie Control 
GOV.UK Frontend GOV.UK Template Google Domains HSTS 
Lodash 1.6.0
Open Graph 
RSS 
core-js 3.46.0
jQuery 3.7.1 jQuery Migrate 3.4.1
Nginx All Detected Technologies (13)
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Lodash is a JavaScript library which provides utility functions for common programming tasks using the functional programming paradigm.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
RSS is a family of web feed formats used to publish frequently updated works—such as blog entries, news headlines, audio, and video—in a standardized format.
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.
Query Migrate is a javascript library that allows you to preserve the compatibility of your jQuery code developed for versions of jQuery older than 1.9.
Observations (3)
WordPress detected — review security configuration
WordPress sites benefit from: protecting wp-login.php, disabling XML-RPC if unused, restricting REST API access, and keeping all plugins and themes up to date. Check the Security tab for specific findings.
No build tool detected
A framework (Cookie Control) 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
13 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/af7bb22b-b0f9-4395-9844-8d4bc7a9a2f7)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/af7bb22b-b0f9-4395-9844-8d4bc7a9a2f7"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.gov.uk" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.gov.ukExport & 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
3 sprints · 13h total → projected B (85)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+2Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 25 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
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+3Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source