Global Performance
6/6 locations ✓High global latency — average 836ms across 6 locations, fastest from Amsterdam (240ms), slowest from Sao Paulo (1441ms). No CDN detected. 4 locations above the 500ms target.
Audit overview
Compliance needs attention; the rest of the categories are in good shape.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
4High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
1High 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-inline' found in script source
Unsafe value (unsafe-inline, unsafe-eval) in script-src defeats CSP's main protection — XSS injections can execute again.
3 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.
Soft 404: server returns HTTP 200 for non-existent pages
Soft 404s (HTTP 200 for missing pages) confuse Google — it indexes the 'not found' page as real content and ranks it.
1 publicly-accessible JavaScript source map(s)
Source maps reveal original source code (variable names, comments, file structure) and are shipped to production by mistake almost universally. The standard fix is a one-line build-tool config change.
13 third-party resources (47% 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
₽26,250 investment → ₽305,341/month returns
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 ~22%.
- Page takes 4.8s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 2.3s 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 279ms after first paint→ Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
- No HSTS headerReturning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request→ Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
- 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 skip-to-content linkKeyboard and screen-reader users must tab through the entire header on every page→ Add a visible-on-focus <a href="#main">Skip to content</a> as the first focusable element
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
Bounce-Rate Cost
₽228 091 /mo
+21.6pp bounce · ~2,163 lost visitors/mo
CPC: RUB 105.45
Bandwidth Waste
₽26 /mo
3520.8 MB/mo × 7.273 RUB/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~352 KB per page loadSaves ₽26/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 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
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.
2.20 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
4.84 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
279 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.
4.88 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.
6.95 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.42 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.49 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
32 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.
2.31 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.
2.49 s
Categories
8Performance
13 third-party resources (47% of weight)
Security
'unsafe-inline' found in script source
Accessibility
3 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.
Top 10% of Cart Functionality sites score 86+ on Compliance; you're at 65 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Framer Motion, with Nginx CDN
Stack Architecture
Yandex.Metrika 
Cart Functionality 
Framer Motion Google Search Console HSTS 
Lucide 
Open Graph 
Priority Hints 
Radix UI 
React 
React Router 7.18.1
Tailwind CSS 
Ubuntu 
shadcn/ui 
Nginx 1.24.0All Detected Technologies (15)
Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.
Websites that have a shopping cart or checkout page, either using a known ecommerce platform or a custom solution.
Framer Motion is a modern animation library for JavaScript, React, and Vue.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Lucide is an open-source icon library that provides 1000+ vector (svg) files for displaying icons and symbols in digital and non-digital projects.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
Priority Hints exposes a mechanism for developers to signal a relative priority for browsers to consider when fetching resources.
Radix UI is a React-based user interface component library that offers accessible, responsive, and customisable components for building web applications.
React is an open-source JavaScript library for building user interfaces or UI components.
React Router provides declarative routing for React.
Tailwind is a utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom user interfaces.
Ubuntu is a free and open-source operating system on Linux for the enterprise server, desktop, cloud, and IoT.
shadcn/ui is a component system built with Radix UI and Tailwind CSS.
Yandex.Metrica is a free web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.
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
15 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/sites/ark-russia.ru)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/ark-russia.ru"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fark-russia.ru" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fark-russia.ruExport & 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 · 8h total → projected A (90)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+5Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 3 button(s) with no accessible text
- · Soft 404: server returns HTTP 200 for non-existent pages
- · 13 third-party resources (47% of weight)
- · 1 publicly-accessible JavaScript source map(s)
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+2Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source