Skip to content
Scanned
2026-09-09 09:25 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
38.00s
Vs prev

Global Performance

6/6 locations

High global latency — average 567ms across 6 locations, fastest from Singapore (252ms), slowest from Sao Paulo (807ms). No CDN (document or assets). Cache-Control header is missing. 3 locations above the 500ms target.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
477ms
DNS 36ms · TLS 150ms
United Stated - New York
652ms
DNS 23ms · TLS 216ms
Singapore - Singapore
252ms
DNS 51ms · TLS 71ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
407ms
DNS 27ms · TLS 132ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
807ms
DNS 110ms · TLS 237ms
United States - Santa Clara
807ms
DNS 68ms · TLS 250ms
CDN: No CDN (document or assets) · Avg TTFB: 567ms · Cache: No cache headers

Audit overview

Compliance 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

HSTS header is missing

Without HSTS, a network attacker can downgrade the very first connection to HTTP and steal the user's session.

Security › Security Headers
Critical: 2

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
Critical: 3

No favicon or icon links detected

Without a favicon, your tab shows a blank icon and bookmarks look unbranded — amateur signal in every browser surface.

Accessibility › Favicon & Branding
Warning: 4

1 render-blocking <script src> tag(s) without async/defer

Performance issues directly impact user engagement and conversion rates.

Performance › JavaScript Blocking
Warning: 5

14 inline style attribute(s) detected

Inline style attributes force `style-src 'unsafe-inline'` in any CSP -- effectively negating CSP's XSS-mitigation value for stylesheets.

Security › CSP Inline-Style Readiness
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. The 1 performance issue below shapes how fast users perceive your page. 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.
1 performance issue — Akamai's research found 53% of mobile users abandon pages over 3s.

Business case

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

Return on investment

€311 investment → €3,377/month returns + EUR 20,500,000 risk avoided

Investment
€311
6.9 h · 5 findings
Monthly returns
€3.377
€40.519/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+12918% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided EUR 20.500.000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
€410.0 mo payback · +98128% 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.
€41 — 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

5 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~15%.

Barriers
5
1 crit 4 warn
Bounce delta
+15pp
added vs baseline
Score
78
B
Speed
0
Trust
1
Usability
0
Content
2
Nav
2
  • 5 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
  • No HSTS header
    Returning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request
    → Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
  • 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
  • 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, …)
  • No skip-to-content link
    Keyboard 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

€311 6.9 developer hours at €45/hr
Quick wins
€41 3 fixes in ~55 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

€3.377 / month at risk ~€40.519 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

€20.500.000

GDPREAA
  • No privacy policy found (page links and common paths checked)
    GDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    GDPR: EUR 10.000 – EUR 20.000.000
  • No <main> landmark found
    EAA: EUR 1.000 – EUR 500.000

Bounce-Rate Cost

€3.377 /mo

+15.3pp bounce · ~1,535 lost visitors/mo

CPC: EUR 2.20

Bandwidth Waste

€0,04 /mo

555.6 MB/mo × 0.074 EUR/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~56 KB per page load
    Saves €0,04/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 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

Bounce-rate model & assumptions

Your data stays in your browser — nothing is sent to our servers

Lighthouse

Mobile

97
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
86
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.
91
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.

1.87 s

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

1.87 s

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.

0.077

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

1.88 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.

1.87 s

Desktop

99
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
86
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.
91
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.

662 ms

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

662 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.

0.045

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

785 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.

662 ms

Categories

8
Avg score 81.8

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Domains · 233 peers
You 84
·
Avg 75
+9 above average
0 50 100
Better than 98% of Google Domains sites See full Google Domains benchmark →
Google Font API · 1216 peers
You 84
·
Avg 74
+10 above average
0 50 100
Security P97Performance P94Compliance P10Content P10Accessibility P87Sustainability P87SEO P44Infrastructure P52

Top 10% of Google Font API sites score 85+ on Compliance; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 95% of Google Font API sites See full Google Font API benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Domains, on LiteSpeed

6 technologies detected 3 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Complex

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Hostinger
Framework
Google Domains Google Font API Google Workspace HTTP/3
Server
LiteSpeed

All Detected Technologies (6)

LiteSpeed is a high-scalability web server.

Categories Web servers Website https://litespeedtech.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Server header: LiteSpeed
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →
Categories DNS Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence NS record: ns-cloud-a1.googledomains.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/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

Hostinger is an employee-owned Web hosting provider and internet domain registrar.

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

Observations (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (Google Domains) 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.

BeaverCheck badge

This badge auto-updates with your latest scan result.

[![BeaverCheck](https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmyuxscore.com)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/myuxscore.com)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/myuxscore.com"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmyuxscore.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmyuxscore.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 · 7h total → projected A (91)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+5

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

3 findings 1h → B (89)
  • · No <main> landmark found
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · No favicon or icon links detected

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+2

Medium effort, high structural impact

2 findings 6h → A (91)
  • · 1 render-blocking <script src> tag(s) without async/defer
  • · 14 inline style attribute(s) detected

Send Feedback