Skip to content
Scanned
2026-10-21 11:56 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
57.00s
Vs prev
—

Global Performance

6/6 locations ✓

Acceptable global latency — average 277ms across 6 locations, fastest from New York (106ms), slowest from Singapore (595ms). Assets on AWS CloudFront (host framerusercontent.com, 27 assets); document served directly from origin. 1 location above the 500ms target.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
291ms
DNS 74ms · TLS 41ms
United Stated - New York
106ms
DNS 53ms · TLS 32ms
United States - Santa Clara
167ms
DNS 65ms · TLS 53ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
219ms
DNS 36ms · TLS 36ms
Singapore - Singapore
595ms
DNS 294ms · TLS 23ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
287ms
DNS 73ms · TLS 43ms
CDN: AWS CloudFront (assets only) · Avg TTFB: 277ms · Cache: public, max-age=0, must-revalidate

Audit overview

Compliance and Sustainability need attention; the other categories are in good shape.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

4

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

1

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

Your mail setup has problems.

studiopravaha.com fails 2 mail checks: No DMARC record found, No SPF record found. This is the kind of misconfiguration that sends your mail to spam.

Get a full deliverability audit — €179, 48h →

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

Page weighs 10.1 MB (8.9 MB transferred)

Informational: total page weight (uncompressed) and bytes actually transferred over the wire.

Performance › Page Weight Budget
Critical: 3

5 link(s) with no accessible text

Links with no accessible text (empty <a></a>, image-only no alt, icon-only no aria-label) are unidentifiable to screen readers.

Accessibility › Link & Button Quality
Critical: 4

Missing <html lang> attribute (WCAG 3.1.1)

Missing <html lang> attribute -- screen readers default to the user's system language and pronounce content with the wrong phonetics.

Accessibility › Document Language
Critical: 5

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
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 41.9s 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.
1 security gap detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
Your LCP is 41.9s — fixing the 1 performance critical could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.
3 accessibility issues exclude 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

$375 investment → $7,671/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided

Investment
$375
3.8 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
$7,671
$92,058/yr
Payback
0.0 mo
+24449% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided USD 157,500
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
$358 → 0.0 mo payback · +25591% 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.
$75 — 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

7 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~29%.

Barriers
7
2 crit 5 warn
Bounce delta
+29pp
added vs baseline
Score
65
C
Speed
2
Trust
1
Usability
0
Content
1
Nav
3
  • Page takes 41.9s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 39.4s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • Page feels frozen for 3.6s
    Clicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs
    → Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
  • 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 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, …)
  • 5 link(s) with generic text ("click here", "read more")
    Screen-reader users navigating by link list see no context — and search engines can't infer relevance
    → Rewrite with descriptive phrases that identify the destination

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

Remediation cost

$375 3.8 developer hours at $100/hr
Quick wins
$75 3 fixes in ~45 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

$7,671 / month at risk ~$92,058 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

$157,500

ADA Title IIICCPA/CPRA
  • No privacy policy found (page links and common paths checked)
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • No <main> landmark found
    ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

$7,669 /mo

+28.5pp bounce · ~2,851 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 2.69

Bandwidth Waste

$2.25 /mo

28131.2 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~2.8 MB per page load
    Saves $2.25/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 5 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

38
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
72
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.
100
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.

1.17 s

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

41.94 s

Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.

3.60 s

Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.

0.002

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

7.00 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.

46.17 s

Desktop

98
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
72
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
96
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
100
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.

294 ms

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

910 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.

0.005

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

1.17 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.

912 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 76.6

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Framer Sites · 17 peers
You 79
·
Avg 76
At average
0 50 100
Better than 58% of Framer Sites sites See full Framer Sites benchmark →
Framer Motion · 118 peers
You 79
·
Avg 75
At average
0 50 100
Better than 70% of Framer Motion sites See full Framer Motion benchmark →

Technology stack

Framer Sites

8 technologies detected 2 stack layers 1 with CPE identifier Complex

Stack Architecture

CMS
Framer Sites
Framework
Framer Motion Google Font API HSTS HTTP/3 Open Graph Priority Hints React

All Detected Technologies (8)

Framer is primarily a design and prototyping tool. It allows you to design interactive prototypes of websites and applications using production components and real data.

Categories Page builders Website https://framer.com/sites Detected by BeaverCheck

Framer Motion is a modern animation library for JavaScript, React, and Vue.

Categories JavaScript libraries Website https://motion.dev Detected by BeaverCheck

Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.

Categories Font scripts Website https://fonts.google.com/ Detected by BeaverCheck

HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.

Categories Security Website https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6797#section-6.1 Detected by BeaverCheck

HTTP/3 is the third major version of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol used to exchange information on the World Wide Web.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://httpwg.org/ Detected by BeaverCheck

Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.

Categories Miscellaneous Website https://ogp.me Detected by BeaverCheck

Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.

Categories Performance Website https://wicg.github.io/priority-hints/ Detected by BeaverCheck

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 →

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (Framer Motion) 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

8 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.

BeaverCheck badge

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studiopravaha.com)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/studiopravaha.com)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/studiopravaha.com"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studiopravaha.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studiopravaha.com

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 · 4h total → projected B (87)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+6

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

4 findings 1h → B (85)
  • · Page weighs 10.1 MB (8.9 MB transferred)
  • · Missing <html lang> attribute (WCAG 3.1.1)
  • · No <main> landmark found
  • · 5 link(s) with no accessible text

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+2

Medium effort, high structural impact

1 findings 3h → B (87)
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing

Send Feedback