Skip to content
Scanned
2026-04-21 22:39 UTC
Worker
🇪🇸 Madrid
Duration
3.8m
Vs prev

Audit overview

Security and Accessibility need attention; the other categories are in good shape.

Fix Priority Matrix

5 findings

Quick Wins

1

High impact, low effort — start here.

Strategic

4

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

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

No Content-Security-Policy header found

Without a CSP, a single XSS bug can exfiltrate everything users type — credentials, payment data, session tokens.

Security › Content Security Policy
Warning: 3

151 third-party resources (99% of weight)

Informational: third-party resource count and their share of page weight. High share caps perf gains from frontend optimization.

Performance › Page Weight Inventory
Warning: 4

152 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing

High HTTP request count — bundling, sprite-ing, and HTTP/2 server push can reduce per-request overhead.

Performance › Page Weight Budget
Warning: 5

Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing

COEP enforces that all embedded resources opt-in to cross-origin embedding — required for cross-origin isolation features.

Security › Security Headers
What fixing these means. Your site has several issues that may be affecting user experience and business outcomes. Your LCP of 8.7s exceeds Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold and the 2 performance issues below directly contribute to it. Addressing the critical issues below would have the most immediate impact on your user trust.
3 security gaps detected — browsers may warn visitors about your site.
Your LCP is 8.7s — fixing the 2 performance criticals could bring it under Google's 2.5s 'Good' threshold.

Business case

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

Return on investment

¥3,850 investment → ¥51,614/month returns + CNY 50,000,000 risk avoided

Investment
¥3,850
11.0 h · 4 findings
Monthly returns
¥51,614
¥619,365/yr
Payback
0.1 mo
+15987% Y1
Regulatory risk avoided CNY 50,000,000
Or — fix only the top 3 findings
¥3,5000.1 mo payback · +17596% 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.

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 ~32%.

Barriers
5
2 crit 3 warn
Bounce delta
+32pp
added vs baseline
Score
71
B
Speed
2
Trust
2
Usability
1
Content
0
Nav
0
  • Page takes 8.7s to load
    Users abandon at ~3s — you're 6.2s over the 2.5s threshold
    → Optimize render-blocking resources, preload the hero image, and compress images
  • No viewport meta tag
    Mobile browsers render at desktop width and shrink — text unreadable, tap targets miniature
    → Add <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
  • High main-thread blocking time
    Page is non-interactive for 212ms after first paint
    → Defer third-party scripts and split large bundles
  • 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

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

Remediation cost

¥3,850 11.0 developer hours at ¥350/hr

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

¥32,215 / month at risk ~¥386,583 / year if left unfixed
Default is 10,000. Use your own number for accurate $-figures.

Compliance Risk

¥50,000,000

PIPL
  • No privacy policy link detected
    PIPL: CNY 100,000 – CNY 50,000,000

Bounce-Rate Cost

¥32,209 /mo

+32.2pp bounce · ~3,221 lost visitors/mo

CPC: CNY 10.00

Bandwidth Waste

¥6.23 /mo

10909.0 MB/mo × 0.571 CNY/GB

  • Optimize transfer: save ~1.1 MB per page load
    Saves ¥6.23/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 2 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

56
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
75
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
81
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
100
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.

3.76 s

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

8.66 s

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

212 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.

8.43 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.

12.14 s

Desktop

73
Performance Overall performance score (0–100) based on Core Web Vitals and other metrics. 90+ is good.
71
Accessibility Measures how accessible the page is for users with disabilities. Checks color contrast, ARIA labels, and semantic HTML.
77
Best Practices Checks for modern web development best practices including HTTPS, no console errors, and secure JavaScript.
83
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.

790 ms

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

1.47 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.

0.245

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

8.03 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.

1.49 s

Categories

6
Avg score 68.0

How you compare

Where this site stands against peers running the same stack.

HSTS · 2715 peers
You 66
·
Avg 75
-9 below average
0 50 100
Accessibility P1Compliance P74Security P31Infrastructure P31Performance P34Sustainability P34

Top 10% of HSTS sites score 79+ on Accessibility; you're at 30 — closing this gap is the highest-leverage improvement.

OpenResty · 46 peers
You 66
·
Avg 72
-6 below average
0 50 100
Better than 6% of OpenResty sites See full OpenResty benchmark →

Technology stack

HSTS, on OpenResty, with Nginx CDN

3 technologies detected 3 stack layers 2 with CPE identifier Standard

Stack Architecture

Framework
HSTS
Server
OpenResty
CDN
Nginx

All Detected Technologies (3)

Nginx is a web server that can also be used as a reverse proxy, load balancer, mail proxy and HTTP cache.

Categories Web servers, Reverse proxies Website https://nginx.org/en Detected by BeaverCheck
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

OpenResty is a web platform based on nginx which can run Lua scripts using its LuaJIT engine.

Categories Web servers Website https://openresty.org Detected by BeaverCheck Evidence Server header: openresty+
This technology has a CPE identifier — check for known vulnerabilities Search NVD →

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 (1)

No build tool detected

A framework (HSTS) 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%2Fhuanqiu.com)](https://beavercheck.com/sites/huanqiu.com)
<a href="https://beavercheck.com/sites/huanqiu.com"><img src="https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhuanqiu.com" alt="BeaverCheck Score"></a>
https://beavercheck.com/badge?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhuanqiu.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 · 11h total → projected C (74)

Sprint 1: Quick Wins

+1

Highest ROI — low effort, high impact

1 findings 0h → D (67)
  • · 151 third-party resources (99% of weight)

Sprint 2: Core Fixes

+7

Medium effort, high structural impact

4 findings 11h → C (74)
  • · Content-Security-Policy header is missing
  • · No Content-Security-Policy header found
  • · Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy header is missing
  • · 152 HTTP requests — consider bundling or reducing

Send Feedback