https://accounts.google.com Export & share

Scanned

2026-04-21 18:47 UTC

Worker

🇪🇸 Madrid

Duration

37.00s

Vs prev

—

Audit overview

Accessibility and Content need attention; the other categories are in good shape.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Impact

Quick Wins

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

High impact, requires investment.

Easy Improvements

Small gains, minimal effort.

Nothing in this quadrant — good news.

Deprioritize

Low impact, high effort — do last.

Nothing in this quadrant — good news.

← Low effort High effort →

Screenshots

DESKTOP + MOBILE

Desktop

Mobile

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact

'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.

Security › Content Security Policy

'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.

Security › Content Security Policy

1 control(s) without accessible label

Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.

Accessibility › Form Accessibility

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

16 third-party resources (78% 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

What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 6.8s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 1 performance issue below directly contributes to it. Accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology — an estimated 15% of your potential audience. 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 6.8s — 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

$1,317 investment → $13,015/month returns + USD 150,000 risk avoided

Investment

$1,317

13.2 h · 4 findings

Monthly returns

$13,015

$156,177/yr

Payback

0.1 mo

+11762% Y1

Regulatory risk avoided USD 150,000

Or — fix only the top 3 findings

$1,300 → 0.1 mo payback · +11914% 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.

$17 — 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

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

Barriers

1 crit 8 warn

Bounce delta

+29pp

added vs baseline

Score

Speed

Trust

Usability

Content

Nav

Page takes 6.8s to load
Users abandon at ~3s — you're 4.3s over the 2.5s threshold
→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
High main-thread blocking time
Page is non-interactive for 479ms after first paint
→ Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
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
1 form field(s) without a label
Screen readers skip unlabeled fields; autofill can't identify them; checkout abandonment spikes
→ Associate every input with a visible <label for="…">; add autocomplete attributes
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

$1,317 13.2 developer hours at $100/hr

Quick wins

$17 1 fixes in ~10 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.

Custom rate

$ /hr

Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead

How developer rates are sourced

Warning:Cost of inaction

$7,921 / month at risk ~$95,049 / year if left unfixed

Compliance Risk

$150,000

ADA Title III

No <main> landmark found
ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000
No <nav> landmark found
ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000
Skip navigation link is missing (WCAG 2.4.1)
ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

$7,921 /mo

+29.4pp bounce · ~2,944 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 2.69

Bandwidth Waste

$0.19 /mo

2343.0 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

Optimize transfer: save ~234 KB per page load
Saves $0.19/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

Monthly visitors

Unique monthly visitors from your analytics

Conversion rate (%)

Purchases, signups, or key actions

Avg. order value

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 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

Bounce-rate model & assumptions

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.

6.10 s

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

6.76 s

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

479 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.

6.10 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.

6.86 s

Desktop

First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.

406 ms

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

823 ms

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

94 ms

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

0.008

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

744 ms

Time to Interactive Time to Interactive — how long until the page is fully interactive and responds to user input. Under 3.8s is good.

1.54 s

Categories

Avg score 76.9

Performance

1 warning

/100

16 third-party resources (78% of weight)

Security

2 critical

/100

'unsafe-eval' found in script source

Accessibility

2 critical

/100

1 control(s) without accessible label

SEO

/100

All checks pass

Infrastructure

Good

/100

All checks pass

Compliance

Good

/100

All checks pass

Content

Needs work

/100

All checks pass

Sustainability

Good

/100

All checks pass

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Search Console · 3817 peers

You 77

Avg 73

At average

0 50 100

Content P5Security P90Compliance P85Performance P80SEO P23Infrastructure P27Sustainability P66Accessibility P38

Top 10% of Google Search Console sites score 96+ on Content; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 78% of Google Search Console sites See full Google Search Console benchmark →

Google Workspace · 1764 peers

You 77

Avg 74

At average

0 50 100

Content P4Security P90Compliance P83Infrastructure P21Performance P78SEO P24Accessibility P34Sustainability P60

Top 10% of Google Workspace sites score 96+ on Content; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 74% of Google Workspace sites See full Google Workspace benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Search Console, on Java, hosted on OpenGSE

6 technologies detected 3 stack layers 1 with CPE identifier Complex

Stack Architecture

Framework

Google Search Console Google Workspace HSTS

HTTP/3

Runtime

Java

Hosting

OpenGSE

All Detected Technologies (6)

OpenGSE is a test suite used for testing servlet compliance. It is deployed by using WAR files that are deployed on the server engine.

Categories Web servers Website https://code.google.com/p/opengse Detected by BeaverCheck

Java is a class-based, object-oriented programming language that is designed to have as few implementation dependencies as possible.

Categories Programming languages Website https://java.com Detected by BeaverCheck

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

Categories Analytics Detected by BeaverCheck · Medium Evidence TXT record: google-site-verification=vK4ovh56lkrEBc4GqA6djmGEyFWtcujz3MuRk-wO9cc

Categories Email Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence MX record: gmr-smtp-in.l.google.com

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

Observations (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Search Console) 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.

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

Markdown

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Faccounts.google.com)](https://beavercheck.com/results/c6e43078-fec8-4f99-8ba4-4a261a4998cb)

HTML

<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/c6e43078-fec8-4f99-8ba4-4a261a4998cb"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Faccounts.google.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>

Image URL

https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Faccounts.google.com

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 (86)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → B (80)

· No <main> landmark found
· 16 third-party resources (78% of weight)

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

Medium effort, high structural impact

1 findings 1h → B (81)

· 1 control(s) without accessible label

Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements

Higher effort, long-term payoff

2 findings 12h → B (86)

· 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
· 'unsafe-inline' found in script source