Skip to content
GB · GBP (£) · Estimated Applicable regulations: UK GDPR · PECR · Equality Act 2010 Dev cost: £75/hr How jurisdiction is detected
Scanned
2026-06-19 14:36 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
1.0m
Vs prev

Global Performance

6/6 locations

High global latency — average 1582ms across 6 locations, fastest from New York (479ms), slowest from Singapore (3706ms). No CDN detected. Cache-Control disables caching (no-store). 5 locations above the 500ms target.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
809ms
DNS 49ms · TLS 103ms
United Stated - New York
479ms
DNS 221ms · TLS 13ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
718ms
DNS 37ms · TLS 104ms
United States - Santa Clara
973ms
DNS 431ms · TLS 74ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
2806ms
DNS 568ms · TLS 133ms
Singapore - Singapore
3706ms
DNS 485ms · TLS 263ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 1582ms · Cache: no-store

Audit overview

Compliance needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.

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
Mobile
Mobile screenshot

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact
Critical: 1

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: 2

2 image(s) missing alt attribute

Each image without alt text is a WCAG 1.1.1 failure — invisible to screen-reader users, lost from Google Image Search.

Accessibility › Alt Text Quality
Critical: 3

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: 4

15 third-party resources (73% of weight)

Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.

Performance › Page Weight Inventory
Warning: 5

24 inline style attribute(s) detected

Inline style attributes force `style-src 'unsafe-inline'` in any CSP -- effectively negating CSP's XSS-mitigation value for stylesheets.

Security › CSP Inline-Style Readiness
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 3.8s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 1 performance issue below directly contributes to it. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
2 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
2 accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology.
Your LCP is 3.8s — fixing the 1 performance critical could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.

Business case

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

Return on investment

£444 investment → £6,475/month returns + GBP 17,550,000 risk avoided

Investment
£444
5.9 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
£6,475
£77,698/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+17409% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided GBP 17,550,000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
£1440.0 mo payback · +53951% 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.
£31 — 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

8 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~22%.

Barriers
8
8 warn
Bounce delta
+22pp
added vs baseline
Score
76
B
Speed
1
Trust
2
Usability
1
Content
3
Nav
1
  • Page loads in 3.8s
    Every additional 100ms above 2.5s costs conversions — you're 1.3s over
    → Target <2.5s LCP: defer non-critical scripts and optimize the hero image
  • 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
  • Viewport disables user zoom
    Visitors with low vision can't read the page — and some jurisdictions treat this as a legal risk
    → Remove user-scalable=no; drop maximum-scale if it's below 2
  • 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

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

Remediation cost

£444 5.9 developer hours at £75/hr
Quick wins
£31 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

£4,542 / month at risk ~£54,510 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

£17,550,000

UK GDPREquality Act 2010
  • No privacy policy link detected
    UK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    UK GDPR: GBP 10,000 – GBP 17,500,000
  • No <main> landmark found
    Equality Act 2010: GBP 500 – GBP 50,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

£4,542 /mo

+21.6pp bounce · ~2,163 lost visitors/mo

CPC: GBP 2.10

Bandwidth Waste

£0.32 /mo

5030.4 MB/mo × 0.063 GBP/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~503 KB per page load
    Saves £0.32/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 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

Bounce-rate model & assumptions

Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers

Lighthouse

Categories

8
Avg score 80.6

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

WordPress · 803 peers
You 83
·
Avg 75
+8 above average
0 50 100
Compliance P1Security P98Accessibility P95SEO P12Performance P86Content P17Sustainability P61Infrastructure P46

Top 10% of WordPress sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 62 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 94% of WordPress sites See full WordPress benchmark →
React · 1039 peers
You 83
·
Avg 74
+9 above average
0 50 100
Compliance P1Security P95Accessibility P94Performance P90Content P18SEO P20Sustainability P76Infrastructure P60

Top 10% of React sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 62 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 94% of React sites See full React benchmark →

Technology stack

WordPress, hosted on Next.js, with Nginx CDN

5 technologies detected 4 stack layers 3 with CPE identifier Standard

Stack Architecture

CMS
WordPress
Framework
React Webpack
CDN
Nginx 1.24.0
Hosting
Next.js

All Detected Technologies (5)

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/1.24.0
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Next.js is a React framework for developing single page Javascript applications.

Categories JavaScript frameworks, Web frameworks, Web servers, Static site generator Website https://nextjs.org Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence X-Powered-By: Next.js in redirect
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →
Categories CMS Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence robots.txt Disallow pattern: /wp-admin/

React is an open-source JavaScript library for building user interfaces or UI components.

Categories JavaScript frameworks Website https://reactjs.org Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Webpack is an open-source JavaScript module bundler.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://webpack.js.org/ Detected by BeaverCheck

Observations (2)

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.

→ Security

No build tool detected

A framework (React) 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%2FMattsairporttransfers.co.uk)](https://beavercheck.com/results/c2216db0-1ebe-4a09-9d14-3a454f8bdfad)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/c2216db0-1ebe-4a09-9d14-3a454f8bdfad"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2FMattsairporttransfers.co.uk" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2FMattsairporttransfers.co.uk

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 · 6h total → projected A (90)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+5

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 0h → B (88)
  • · No <main> landmark found
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · 15 third-party resources (73% of weight)

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+2

Medium effort, high structural impact

2 findings 6h → A (90)
  • · 2 image(s) missing alt attribute
  • · 24 inline style attribute(s) detected

Send Feedback