Audit overview
3 categories need attention: Performance, and 2 others.
Fix Priority Matrix
5 findingsQuick Wins
3High impact, low effort — start here.
Strategic
2High 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
Top Priorities (5)
1 control(s) without accessible label
Form controls without labels — assistive tech announces 'edit text' with no context; users can't complete forms.
10 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.
3 image-in-link without alt text
Image-only links with no alt create empty links — screen-reader users hear 'link' with no destination context.
4 button(s) with no accessible text
Buttons with no accessible text (icon-only, no aria-label) can't be activated by voice control or understood by screen readers.
72 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.
Business case
What fixing the audit's findings is worth -- and what ignoring them keeps costing.
Return on investment
IDR 2,000,000 investment → IDR 192,421,411/month returns + IDR 60,000,000,000 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
9 barrier(s) likely increasing bounce by ~32%.
- Page takes 7.6s to loadUsers abandon at ~3s — you're 5.1s over the 2.5s threshold→ Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
- Page feels frozen for 7.1sClicks on the primary CTA are ignored while JavaScript runs→ Break up long tasks; defer non-critical JavaScript to post-hydration
- 8 broken link(s) on the pageClicks land on 404s — trust drops and the session often ends→ Fix or remove the broken destinations surfaced on the Content tab
- No Content-Security-Policy headerHigher 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 labelScreen readers skip unlabeled fields; autofill can't identify them; checkout abandonment spikes→ Associate every input with a visible <label for="…">; add autocomplete attributes
Preliminary CRO audit — each barrier links to the tab with detailed analysis.
Remediation cost
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.
Rates reflect fully-loaded developer cost including overhead
Warning:Cost of inaction
Compliance Risk
IDR 60,000,000,000
- No privacy policy link detectedUU PDP: IDR 1,000,000,000 – IDR 60,000,000,000
- 5 advertising/retargeting trackers detectedUU PDP: IDR 1,000,000,000 – IDR 60,000,000,000
- Trackers detected but no cookie policy foundUU PDP: IDR 1,000,000,000 – IDR 60,000,000,000
Bounce-Rate Cost
IDR 181,825,305 /mo
+32.2pp bounce · ~3,221 lost visitors/mo
CPC: IDR 56451.61
Bandwidth Waste
IDR 12,246 /mo
9490.5 MB/mo × 1290.323 IDR/GB
- Optimize transfer: save ~949 KB per page loadSaves IDR 12,246/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 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
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.
4.98 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
7.56 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
7.06 s
Cumulative Layout Shift Cumulative Layout Shift — measures visual stability. How much the page layout shifts during loading. Under 0.1 is good.
0.025
Speed Index Speed Index — how quickly content is visually displayed during load. Under 3.4s is good.
9.01 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.
24.06 s
Desktop
First Contentful Paint First Contentful Paint — how long until the browser renders the first piece of content. Under 1.8s is good.
2.86 s
Largest Contentful Paint Largest Contentful Paint — how long until the largest visible element loads. Under 2.5s is good.
3.34 s
Total Blocking Time Total Blocking Time — total time the main thread was blocked, preventing user input. Under 200ms is good.
360 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.
4.97 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.
7.15 s
Categories
8Performance
All checks pass
Security
All checks pass
Accessibility
1 control(s) without accessible label
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 core-js sites score 71+ on Accessibility; you're at 43 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Top 10% of Facebook SDK sites score 70+ on Accessibility; you're at 43 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.
Technology stack
Facebook SDK
Stack Architecture
DoubleClick Floodlight 
DoubleVerify 
Facebook Pixel 2.9.303
Google Analytics 
Google Publisher Tag 
Google Tag Manager 
Integral Ad Science 
Matomo Analytics 
Prebid 9.47.0
Funding Choices 
Google Font API Google Search Console Google Workspace HSTS 
Open Graph 
core-js 3.32.2
jQuery All Detected Technologies (18)
Funding Choices is a messaging tool that can help you comply with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and recover lost revenue from ad blocking users.
Google Font API is a web service that supports open-source font files that can be used on your web designs.
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.
core-js is a modular standard library for JavaScript, with polyfills for cutting-edge ECMAScript features.
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.
DoubleVerify is a software platform for digital media measurement, data, and analytics.
Facebook pixel is an analytics tool that allows you to measure the effectiveness of your advertising.
Google Analytics is a free web analytics service that tracks and reports website traffic.
Google Publisher Tag (GPT) is an ad tagging library for Google Ad Manager which is used to dynamically build ad requests.
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.
Integral Ad Science is an American publicly owned technology company that analyses the value of digital advertising placements.
Matomo Analytics is a free and open-source web analytics application, that runs on a PHP/MySQL web-server.
Prebid is an open-source header bidding wrapper. It forms the core of our Nucleus ad platform, helping maximize revenue and performance for publishers.
Observations (2)
No build tool detected
A framework (Facebook SDK) 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
18 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/results/f3d66301-ec45-4bd5-a195-f1e6d7d89919)<a href="https://beavercheck.com/results/f3d66301-ec45-4bd5-a195-f1e6d7d89919"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdetik.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdetik.comExport & 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
2 sprints · 4h total → projected C (75)
Sprint 1: Quick Wins
+3Highest ROI — low effort, high impact
- · 3 image-in-link without alt text
- · 4 button(s) with no accessible text
- · 72 link(s) with no accessible text
Sprint 2: Core Fixes
+1Medium effort, high structural impact
- · 1 control(s) without accessible label
- · 10 image(s) missing alt attribute