Skip to content
Scanned
2026-08-17 09:11 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
41.00s
Vs prev

Global Performance

6/6 locations

Acceptable global latency — average 435ms across 6 locations, fastest from Santa Clara (246ms), slowest from Singapore (855ms). No CDN detected. Cache-Control header is missing. 2 locations above the 500ms target.

Spain - Madrid
Full audit
441ms
DNS 122ms · TLS 109ms
United Stated - New York
289ms
DNS 252ms · TLS 17ms
United States - Santa Clara
246ms
DNS 38ms · TLS 73ms
Brazil - Sao Paulo
509ms
DNS 155ms · TLS 123ms
Netherlands - Amsterdam
273ms
DNS 20ms · TLS 91ms
Singapore - Singapore
855ms
DNS 189ms · TLS 226ms
CDN: No CDN · Avg TTFB: 435ms · Cache: No cache headers

Audit overview

Content and Sustainability need attention; the other categories are in good shape.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

4

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

1

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

Page weighs 8.3 MB (7.9 MB transferred)

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

Performance › Page Weight Budget
Critical: 3

1 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

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: 5

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
What fixing these means. Your site performs reasonably well, but a few targeted fixes could meaningfully improve results. Your LCP of 38.8s 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 38.8s — 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

$192 investment → $7,541/month returns + USD 157,500 risk avoided

Investment
$192
1.9 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
$7,541
$90,496/yr
Payback
0.0 mo
+47115% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided USD 157,500
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
$1420.0 mo payback · +63779% 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.
$92 — 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

9 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~28%.

Barriers
9
1 crit 8 warn
Bounce delta
+28pp
added vs baseline
Score
66
C
Speed
1
Trust
2
Usability
1
Content
3
Nav
2
  • Page takes 38.8s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 36.3s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • No HSTS header
    Returning visitors are briefly exposed to downgrade attacks on first request
    → Set Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
  • 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
  • 1 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

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

Remediation cost

$192 1.9 developer hours at $100/hr
Quick wins
$92 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

$7,541 / month at risk ~$90,496 / 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 link detected
    CCPA/CPRA: USD 2,500 – USD 7,500
  • No <main> landmark found
    ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000
  • Skip navigation link is missing (WCAG 2.4.1)
    ADA Title III: USD 25,000 – USD 150,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

$7,539 /mo

+28.0pp bounce · ~2,803 lost visitors/mo

CPC: USD 2.69

Bandwidth Waste

$1.98 /mo

24785.1 MB/mo × 0.080 USD/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~2.5 MB per page load
    Saves $1.98/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

55
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.

9.09 s

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

38.82 s

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

87 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.

12.81 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.

39.26 s

Desktop

81
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.
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.

750 ms

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

3.01 s

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

9 ms

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

0.002

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

1.47 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.

3.01 s

Categories

8
Avg score 78.0

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

Google Font API · 1125 peers
You 81
·
Avg 74
+7 above average
0 50 100
Security P93Content P8Performance P87Compliance P17Accessibility P81Sustainability P34Infrastructure P35SEO P58

Top 10% of Google Font API sites score 95+ on Content; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 90% of Google Font API sites See full Google Font API benchmark →
HTTP/3 · 1688 peers
You 81
·
Avg 76
At average
0 50 100
Content P3Sustainability P15Security P81Compliance P23Infrastructure P24Accessibility P75Performance P69SEO P67

Top 10% of HTTP/3 sites score 96+ on Content; you're at 66 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

Better than 79% of HTTP/3 sites See full HTTP/3 benchmark →

Technology stack

Google Font API, on LiteSpeed

5 technologies detected 3 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Standard

Stack Architecture

Analytics
Hostinger
Framework
Google Font API HTTP/3 Tailwind CSS
Server
LiteSpeed

All Detected Technologies (5)

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 →

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/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

Tailwind is a utility-first CSS framework for rapidly building custom user interfaces.

Categories UI frameworks Website https://tailwindcss.com/ Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Found 181 unique Tailwind utility classes in HTML

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 Font API) 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%2Fstry-kon.com)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/stry-kon.com)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/stry-kon.com"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstry-kon.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstry-kon.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 · 2h total → projected B (89)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+8

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

4 findings 1h → B (89)
  • · Page weighs 8.3 MB (7.9 MB transferred)
  • · No <main> landmark found
  • · HSTS header is missing
  • · No favicon or icon links detected

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

Medium effort, high structural impact

1 findings 1h → B (89)
  • · 1 control(s) without accessible label

Send Feedback