Audit overview
Accessibility and Content need attention; the other categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
3High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
2High 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.
No Content-Security-Policy header found
Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.
Page weighs 7.0 MB (4.0 MB transferred)
Informational: total page weight (uncompressed) and bytes actually transferred over the wire.
2 button(s) with no accessible text
Buttons with no accessible text (icon-only, no aria-label) can't be activated by voice control or understood by screen readers.
113 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.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
$650 investment → $6,991/month returns + USD 157,500 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 ~26%.
- Page takes 18.8s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 16.3s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 1.3sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- 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 Open Graph tagsLinks 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 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
$157,500
- No privacy policy link detectedCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
- Trackers detected but no privacy policy foundCCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
Bounce-Rate Cost
$6,990 /mo
+26.0pp bounce · ~2,598 lost visitors/mo
CPC: USD 2.69
Bandwidth Waste
$1.02 /mo
12714.3 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~1.3 MB per page loadSaves $1.02/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 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
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.
3.66 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
18.83 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
1.26 s
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.004
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
7.94 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.
22.35 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.32 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.12 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
98 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.015
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
2.79 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.
4.77 s
Categories
8Performance
Page weighs 7.0 MB (4.0 MB transferred)
Security
Content-Security-Policy header is missing
Accessibility
2 button(s) with no accessible text
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.
Technology stack
Adobe Experience Manager, on Java
Stack Architecture
Akamai mPulse 
Dynatrace Dynatrace RUM 
Google Analytics 
Google Tag Manager 
Adobe Experience Manager 
Adobe Client Data Layer 2.0.2
Boomerang Google Search Console HSTS 
Priority Hints Proofpoint 
Java All Detected Technologies (13)
Java is a class-based, object-oriented programming language that is designed to have as few implementation dependencies as possible.
Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) is a content management solution for building websites, mobile apps and forms.
Adobe Client Data Layer is a framework of JavaScript objects on your site that contains all variable values used in your implementation.
boomerang is a JavaScript library that measures the page load time experienced by real users, commonly called RUM (Real User Measurement).
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.
Akamai mPulse is a real user monitoring (RUM) solution that enables companies to monitor, find, and fix website and application performance issues.
Dynatrace is a technology company that produces a software intelligence platform based on artificial intelligence to monitor and optimise application performance and development, IT infrastructure, and user experience for businesses and government agencies throughout the world.
Dynatrace RUM is an AI powered, full stack, automated real user monitoring platform built by Dynatrace.
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.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Adobe Client Data Layer) 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/bbb2bbe6-fdfa-415b-877d-8bbe56995b54)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/bbb2bbe6-fdfa-415b-877d-8bbe56995b54"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnyc.gov" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnyc.govExport & 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 · 6h total → projected B (83)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+5Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · Page weighs 7.0 MB (4.0 MB transferred)
- · 2 button(s) with no accessible text
- · 113 third-party resources (100% of weight)
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+5Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
- · No Content-Security-Policy header found