Skip to content
https://vaibhavstoree.netlify.app Export & share
Recent Trends
Performance stable →
60
TTFB stable →
678ms
FCP stable →
5.9s
LCP stable →
31.4s
Scanned
2026-11-10 03:56 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
37.00s
Vs prev
no change

Audit overview

3 categories need attention: Compliance, and 2 others.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

2

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

3

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

Your mail setup has problems.

vaibhavstoree.netlify.app fails 2 mail checks: No DMARC record found, No SPF record found. This is the kind of misconfiguration that sends your mail to spam.

Get a full deliverability audit — €179, 48h →

Top Priorities (5)

Sorted by impact
Critical: 1

Content-Security-Policy header is missing

Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything your users type — including credentials.

Security › Security Headers
Critical: 2

Page weighs 8.3 MB (7.6 MB transferred)

Informational: total page weight (uncompressed) and bytes actually transferred over the wire.

Performance › Page Weight Budget
Critical: 3

2 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
Critical: 4

24 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: 5

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
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 31.4s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 1 performance issue below directly contributes to it. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
1 security gap detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
Your LCP is 31.4s — fixing the 1 performance critical could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.
3 accessibility issues exclude users who rely on assistive technology.

Business case

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

Return on investment

$567 investment → $3,309/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided

Investment
$567
5.7 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
$3,309
$39,709/yr
Payback
0.2 mo
+6907% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided USD 157,500
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
$550 → 0.2 mo payback · +7120% 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

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

Barriers
7
1 crit 6 warn
Bounce delta
+29pp
added vs baseline
Score
72
B
Speed
1
Trust
1
Usability
1
Content
2
Nav
2
  • Page takes 31.4s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 28.9s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • 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
  • 2 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
  • 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, …)

Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.

Remediation cost

$567 5.7 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.

$ /hr

Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead

How developer rates are sourced

Warning:Cost of inaction

$3,309 / month at risk ~$39,709 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

$157,500

ADA Title IIICCPA/CPRA
  • No privacy policy found (page links and common paths checked)
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • Privacy Policy not detected
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • No <main> landmark found
    ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

$3,307 /mo

+28.5pp bounce · ~2,851 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 1.16

Bandwidth Waste

$1.90 /mo

23810.5 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~2.4 MB per page load
    Saves $1.90/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 5 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

60
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
92
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
100
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
82
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.

5.92 s

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

31.42 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.

0.001

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

5.92 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.

31.42 s

Desktop

69
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
91
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
100
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
82
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.

946 ms

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

7.18 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.

0.138

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

1.17 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.

7.18 s

Categories

8
Avg score 76.4

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Cart Functionality · 869 peers
You 79
·
Avg 76
At average
0 50 100
Content P5Compliance P6Performance P78SEO P23Infrastructure P68Sustainability P36Security P62Accessibility P59

Top 10% of Cart Functionality sites score 94+ on Content; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 60% of Cart Functionality sites See full Cart Functionality benchmark →
Font Awesome · 825 peers
You 79
·
Avg 76
At average
0 50 100
Compliance P4Content P8SEO P26Performance P72Security P71Sustainability P33Accessibility P64Infrastructure P63

Top 10% of Font Awesome sites score 84+ on Compliance; you're at 64 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 64% of Font Awesome sites See full Font Awesome benchmark →

Technology stack

Font Awesome 6.4.0, on Firebase, with Cloudflare CDN

9 technologies detected 4 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Enterprise

Stack Architecture

Ecommerce
Cart Functionality
Framework
Font Awesome 6.4.0 Google Font API HSTS
Runtime
Firebase
CDN
Cloudflare Netlify Netlify CDN cdnjs

All Detected Technologies (9)

Cloudflare is a web-infrastructure and website-security company, providing content-delivery-network services, DDoS mitigation, Internet security, and distributed domain-name-server services.

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

Netlify providers hosting and server-less backend services for web applications and static websites.

Categories PaaS, CDN Website https://www.netlify.com/ Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Header: x-nf-request-id, Server: Netlify, Domain: .netlify.app
Categories CDN Website https://www.netlify.com Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence x-nf-request-id: 01M71SHD763VXVA6K4082QWEQR

cdnjs is a free distributed JS library delivery service.

Categories CDN Website https://cdnjs.com Detected by BeaverCheck

Firebase is a Google-backed application development software that enables developers to develop iOS, Android and Web apps.

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

Websites that have a shopping cart or checkout page, either using a known ecommerce platform or a custom solution.

Categories Ecommerce Website https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopping_cart_software Detected by BeaverCheck

Font Awesome is a font and icon toolkit based on CSS and Less.

Categories Font scripts Website https://fontawesome.com/ Detected by BeaverCheck

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

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

Observations (2)

No build tool detected

A framework (Font Awesome) 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

9 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%2Fvaibhavstoree.netlify.app)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/vaibhavstoree.netlify.app)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/vaibhavstoree.netlify.app"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fvaibhavstoree.netlify.app" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fvaibhavstoree.netlify.app

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 · 6h total → projected B (87)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+4

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

2 findings 0h → B (83)
  • · Page weighs 8.3 MB (7.6 MB transferred)
  • · No <main> landmark found

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+4

Medium effort, high structural impact

3 findings 6h → B (87)
  • · 2 control(s) without accessible label
  • · 24 image(s) missing alt attribute
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing

Send Feedback