Skip to content
Scanned
2026-04-04 16:47 UTC
Worker
🇺🇸 Santa Clara
Duration
59.00s
Vs prev

Audit overview

Accessibility and Content need attention; the other 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
Desktop
Desktop screenshot
Mobile
Mobile screenshot

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact
Critical: 1

16 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: 2

16 image-in-link without alt text

Image-only links with no alt create empty links — screen-reader users hear 'link' with no destination context.

Accessibility › Alt Text Quality
Critical: 3

27 image-only link(s) without alt text

Image-only links with no alt are unidentifiable to screen-reader users — link's destination is invisible.

Accessibility › Link & Button Quality
Critical: 4

8 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
Warning: 5

Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing

COEP enforces that all embedded resources opt-in to cross-origin embedding — required for cross-origin isolation features.

Security › Security Headers
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. 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 audience reach.
4 accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology.
1 security gap detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.

Business case

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

Return on investment

€340 investment → €10,654/month returns + EUR 20,500,000 risk avoided

Investment
€340
4.0 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
€10.654
€127.844/yr
Payback
0.0 mo
+37501% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided EUR 20.500.000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
€2130.0 mo payback · +60062% 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.
€128 — 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 ~28%.

Barriers
7
2 crit 5 warn
Bounce delta
+28pp
added vs baseline
Score
65
C
Speed
2
Trust
1
Usability
0
Content
2
Nav
2
  • Page takes 7.2s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 4.7s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • 3 broken link(s) on the page
    Clicks land on 404s — trust drops and the session often ends
    → Fix or remove the broken destinations surfaced on the Content tab
  • High main-thread blocking time
    Page is non-interactive for 515ms 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
  • 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

€340 4.0 developer hours at €85/hr
Quick wins
€128 3 fixes in ~90 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

€6.220 / month at risk ~€74.635 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

€20.500.000

GDPREAA
  • No privacy policy link detected
    GDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
  • 5 of 5 <nav> elements are unlabeled
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
  • 16 image(s) missing alt attribute
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000

Bounce-Rate Cost

€6.219 /mo

+28.3pp bounce · ~2,827 lost visitors/mo

CPC: EUR 2.20

Bandwidth Waste

€0,19 /mo

2543.5 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~254 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

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 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

54
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
88
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
92
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
85
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.

3.86 s

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

7.20 s

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

515 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.

3.92 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.

7.24 s

Desktop

97
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
88
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
92
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
85
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.

787 ms

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

1.15 s

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

12 ms

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

0.017

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

828 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.

1.62 s

Categories

8
Avg score 76.9

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Cloud Load Balancing · 33 peers
You 76
·
Avg 74
At average
0 50 100
Better than 57% of Google Cloud Load Balancing sites See full Google Cloud Load Balancing benchmark →
Google Cloud Trace · 34 peers
You 76
·
Avg 74
At average
0 50 100
Better than 61% of Google Cloud Trace sites See full Google Cloud Trace benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Cloud Load Balancing, hosted on Google Cloud

11 technologies detected 3 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Enterprise

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Google Analytics Google Tag Manager
Framework
Google Cloud Load Balancing Google Cloud Trace Google Domains Google Font API Google Workspace HSTS HTTP/3 jQuery 3.6.0
Hosting
Google Cloud

All Detected Technologies (11)

Google Cloud is a suite of cloud computing services.

Categories IaaS Website https://cloud.google.com Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

Google Cloud Load Balancing is a scalable, fully managed global load balancing service using Google Frontend.

Categories Load balancers Website https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing Detected by BeaverCheck

Google Cloud Trace is a distributed tracing system that collects latency data from applications and displays it in the Google Cloud Console.

Categories Performance Website https://cloud.google.com/trace Detected by BeaverCheck
Categories DNS Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence NS record: ns4.google.com

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
Categories Email Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence MX record: aspmx.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

jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.

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

Google Analytics is a free web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.

Categories Analytics Website https://google.com/analytics Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Script URL contains www.google-analytics.com: https://www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js

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.

Categories Tag managers Website https://www.google.com/tagmanager Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Script URL contains www.googletagmanager.com: https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-HL38R6X1Q3&cx=c&gtm=4e6411

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Cloud Load Balancing) 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

11 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%2Fgolang.org)](https://beavercheck.com/results/d626a555-a700-433f-b6e8-16a9171d04e4)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/d626a555-a700-433f-b6e8-16a9171d04e4"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgolang.org" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgolang.org

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 (81)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+3

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 2h → C (79)
  • · 16 image-in-link without alt text
  • · 27 image-only link(s) without alt text
  • · 8 link(s) with no accessible text

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+2

Medium effort, high structural impact

2 findings 2h → B (81)
  • · 16 image(s) missing alt attribute
  • · Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing

Send Feedback