Global Performance
6/6 locations ✓High global latency — average 893ms across 6 locations, fastest from Madrid (241ms), slowest from Singapore (1564ms). Assets on AWS CloudFront (host cuatro.sim-cdn.nl, 79 assets); document served directly from origin. 4 locations above the 500ms target.
Audit overview
All categories sit comfortably above the 70 threshold; this is a clean audit.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
1High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
4High 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
Your mail setup has problems.
woensdrecht.nl fails 2 mail checks: No DMARC record found, No SPF record found. This is the kind of misconfiguration that sends your mail to spam.
Top Priorities (5)
'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.
'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.
Wildcard '*' found in script source
script-src * defeats the entire point of CSP — any host can load scripts on your page.
125 third-party resources (90% of weight)
Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.
135 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing
High HTTP request count — bundling, sprite-ing, and HTTP/2 server push can reduce per-request overhead.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
€1,445 investment → €5,891/month returns + EUR 500,000 risk avoided
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 ~27%.
- Page takes 17.5s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 15.0s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 951msClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- Layout shifts during page loadContent movement causes mis-clicks on CTAs and form fields→ Add width/height to images; reserve space for late-loading embeds
- Content is hard to readGraduate-level reading difficulty — limits the addressable audience for product or blog pages→ Shorten sentences; replace jargon with plain language; target Flesch ease ≥60
- 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
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
Compliance Risk
€500.000
- Skip navigation link is missing (WCAG 2.4.1)EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000
Bounce-Rate Cost
€5.890 /mo
+26.8pp bounce · ~2,677 lost visitors/mo
CPC: EUR 2.20
Bandwidth Waste
€0,75 /mo
10108.4 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~1.0 MB per page loadSaves €0,75/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.
8.45 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
17.50 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
951 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.123
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
8.45 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.
17.59 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
1.19 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
2.20 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
16 ms
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.152
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
1.19 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.
2.52 s
Categories
8Performance
125 third-party resources (90% of weight)
Security
'unsafe-eval' found in script source
Accessibility
All checks pass
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 Font Awesome sites score 90+ on Sustainability; you're at 71 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Bunny Fonts, on Turbopack, hosted on Next.js, with Bunny CDN
Stack Architecture
Matomo Analytics Matomo Tag Manager 
Mautic 
Bunny Fonts 
Font Awesome HSTS 
Open Graph 
React 
ReadSpeaker 3.8.11
Webpack 
Turbopack Bunny 
Next.js 16.3.8All Detected Technologies (13)
Next.js is a React framework for developing single page Javascript applications.
Turbopack is an incremental bundler for JavaScript and TypeScript, written in Rust and integrated into the Next.js framework for optimized build performance.
Bunny Fonts is an open-source, privacy-first web font platform designed to put privacy back into the internet.
Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) informs browsers that the site should only be accessed using HTTPS.
Open Graph is a protocol that is used to integrate any web page into the social graph.
React is an open-source JavaScript library for building user interfaces or UI components.
ReadSpeaker is an intuitive text-to-speech API that converts text into natural-sounding audio files for websites and applications.
Webpack is an open-source JavaScript module bundler.
Matomo Analytics is a free and open-source web analytics application, that runs on a PHP/MySQL web-server.
Matomo Tag Manager manages tracking and marketing tags.
Mautic is a free and open-source marketing automation tool for Content Management, Social Media, Email Marketing, and can be used for the integration of social networks, campaign management, forms, questionnaires, reports, etc.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Bunny Fonts) 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
13 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/woensdrecht.nl)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/woensdrecht.nl"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.woensdrecht.nl" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.woensdrecht.nlExport & 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
3 sprints · 17h total → projected A (90)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+1Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 125 third-party resources (90% of weight)
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+3Medium effort, high structural impact
- · Wildcard '*' found in script source
- · 135 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing
Sprint 3: Strategic Improvements
+2Higher effort, long-term payoff
- · 'unsafe-eval' found in script source
- · 'unsafe-inline' found in script source