Website review, no card needed

Artefact logo

artefact.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 27 October 202636 issues · 82 checks

This review found 36 issues worth fixing on artefact.com, 16 of them high impact, across 82 checks. The most urgent: use efficient cache lifetimes. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.

Read the full growth playbook for Artefact

  1. Homepage
  2. Phone render
  3. Links and pages
  4. Google PageSpeed

Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
4.8 s2.7 sMay 9Oct 244.4 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20263.4 s
May 16, 20263.4 s
May 23, 20263.4 s
May 30, 20263.5 s
Jun 6, 20263.5 s
Jun 13, 20263.7 s
Jun 20, 20263.8 s
Jun 27, 20263.8 s
Jul 4, 20263.9 s
Jul 11, 20263.9 s
Jul 18, 20263.9 s
Jul 25, 20263.8 s
Aug 1, 20263.7 s
Aug 8, 20263.5 s
Aug 15, 20263.4 s
Aug 22, 20263.1 s
Aug 29, 20263.0 s
Sep 5, 20262.9 s
Sep 12, 20262.9 s
Sep 19, 20263.2 s
Sep 26, 20263.7 s
Oct 3, 20264.2 s
Oct 10, 20264.6 s
Oct 17, 20264.5 s
Oct 24, 20264.4 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
125 ms93 msMay 9Oct 24121 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 2026121 ms
May 16, 2026116 ms
May 23, 2026113 ms
May 30, 2026112 ms
Jun 6, 2026112 ms
Jun 13, 2026119 ms
Jun 20, 2026116 ms
Jun 27, 2026112 ms
Jul 4, 2026109 ms
Jul 11, 2026101 ms
Jul 18, 2026101 ms
Jul 25, 2026102 ms
Aug 1, 2026101 ms
Aug 8, 202699 ms
Aug 15, 202699 ms
Aug 22, 202697 ms
Aug 29, 2026102 ms
Sep 5, 2026102 ms
Sep 12, 2026102 ms
Sep 19, 2026102 ms
Sep 26, 2026104 ms
Oct 3, 2026108 ms
Oct 10, 2026113 ms
Oct 17, 2026117 ms
Oct 24, 2026121 ms

Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab): real Chrome visitors over rolling 28-day periods.

One score from every part of this review. How it works

Full-page screenshot of artefact.com (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. artefact.com at 0.6 s0.6 s
  2. artefact.com at 1.2 s1.2 s
  3. artefact.com at 1.8 s1.8 s
  4. artefact.com at 2.4 s2.4 s
  5. artefact.com at 2.9 s2.9 s
  6. artefact.com at 3.5 s3.5 s
  7. artefact.com at 4.1 s4.1 s
  8. artefact.com at 4.7 s4.7 s

Speed

8 to fix49
  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    3.5 s · 9.4 MB

    40 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (9.4 MB).

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    1.9 s · 387 KiB

    About 387 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.9 s faster on a phone.

  • Render-blocking requests

    1.3 s

    12 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.3 s.

  • Main-thread work: 10.6 s

    A phone's processor spends 10.6 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.4 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.

  • Mobile performance score: 49

    49/100

    Your mobile performance score is 49 (desktop: 69). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.

  • 3,271 HTML elements

    The page has 3,271 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    600 ms · 126 KiB

    About 126 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 600 ms faster on a phone.

  • 14 long tasks on the main thread

    14 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 283 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • 6 third-party services on the page

    6 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Didomi and XiTi and others), adding 440 KiB and 358 ms of main-thread time.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    200 ms · 10 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 10 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 200 ms faster on a phone.

  • Improve image delivery

    150 ms · 58 KiB

    2 images could be 58 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.

  • Chained critical requests

    Critical files load one after another instead of in parallel (3 chains). Preconnecting to key origins and preloading the hero image shortens the chain.

  • Forced reflow

    Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.

  • Minify JavaScript

    3 KiB

    3 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

1 checks passed
  • Server response: 217 ms

    217 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 217 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

11 to fix67
  • Fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors

    Real Chrome users on phones do not pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)). Google uses this in ranking.

  • Real-user LCP: 4.5 s

    4.5 s

    Real visitors wait 4.5 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 10.8 s

    10.8 s

    Your largest element takes 10.8 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Artefact AI is about people Legrand Savencia Nexans “In sho…”.

  • Time to Interactive: 11.4 s

    11.4 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 11.4 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Speed Index: 7.3 s

    7.3 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 7.3 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Total Blocking Time: 694 ms

    694 ms

    Scripts block taps and scrolling for 694 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Largest content (LCP) got 33% slower for real visitors

    +33%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 3.4 s to 4.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Real-user FCP: 2.8 s

    2.8 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 2.8 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.7 s

    1.7 s

    Real visitors wait 1.7 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • First Contentful Paint: 2.0 s

    2.0 s

    The first text or image appears after 2.0 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • 1 image without width and height

    1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    0%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 121 ms to 121 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

3 checks passed
  • Real-user INP: 133 ms

    133 ms

    Real visitors wait 133 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.06

    0.06

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.06 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.038

    0.038

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.038, good is under 0.1).

Images and page weight

1 to fix70
  • Page weight: 10.5 MB in 55 requests

    10.5 MB

    Your homepage downloads 10.5 MB in 55 requests on a phone: media 8.8 MB (6), scripts 909 KiB (20) and images 363 KiB (6). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • About 3.0 g of CO₂ per visit

    2.98 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 2.98 g of CO₂e: 357.9 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

3 checks passed
  • Images use modern formats

    Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.

  • Images load when needed

    Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.

  • Images are sized for phones

    No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.

Accessibility

6 to fixGoogle 8892
  • ARIA commands must have an accessible name (4 elements)

    ARIA commands must have an accessible name: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.

  • 1 text element with low contrast

    1 text element doesn't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.

  • 8 images without alt text

    8 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.

  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (4 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • 12 links without text

    12 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.

  • 8 tap targets too small

    8 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.

  • Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.

    Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (10 elements).

1 checks passed
  • 48 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 52 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 48 passed and 4 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

3 to fixGoogle 8592
  • 40 links with vague text

    40 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.

  • No XML sitemap

    No XML sitemap at https://www.artefact.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • 1 link crawlers can't follow

    1 link has no real href, so search engines can't follow it.

  • 275 internal links, 27 external

    The homepage links to 275 pages on artefact.com and 27 external pages.

7 checks passed
  • Meta description: 151 characters

    Your meta description is 151 characters: “Global data and AI consulting company. From strategy to deployment: AI solutions by industry, data platforms, governanc…”.

  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Artefact accelerates AI transformation”.

  • Title: 51 characters

    Your title is a healthy 51 characters: “Artefact is a global data and AI consulting company”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://www.artefact.com/.

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: Article, ImageObject, Organization, Person and WebPage.

  • Open Graph tags complete

    Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.

  • robots.txt in place

    robots.txt is in place.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88
  • Organization data is thin (3 of 6 facts)

    Your Organization JSON-LD is missing url, description and contact details. These are the facts AI assistants use to describe a business and to tell it apart from others with a similar name.

2 checks passed
  • AI answer engines may read the site

    Your robots.txt lets the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity read the site and cite it in answers.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (2,305 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

3 to fix86
  • 4 pages share 2 titles

    https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services and https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services-and-private-equity all use the title “Data & AI for Financial Services and Private Equity - Artefact”, and 1 other title repeat too. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

  • 4 pages share a meta description

    https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services and https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services-and-private-equity use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.

  • 2 links to non-canonical URLs

    Your homepage links to 2 pages by a URL that isn't their canonical one, for example https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services, whose canonical is https://www.artefact.com/industries/data-ai-for-financial-services-and-private-equity. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.

  • 15 internal pages checked

    We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 154 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

5 checks passed
  • Linked pages load

    All 15 pages we checked loaded without an error.

  • Every page has a meta description

    All 15 pages that loaded have a meta description.

  • Every page has an H1

    Each page we checked has a main headline.

  • No linked page is hidden from search

    None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.

  • Every page has a title

    All 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.

Best practices

2 to fixGoogle 9687
  • 6 small tap targets

    6 of 30 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

  • 3 JavaScript errors while loading

    3 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Failed to load resource: net::ERR_FAILED”.

  • Missing source maps

    Large scripts ship without source maps.

1 checks passed
  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

1 to fix92
  • No direct contact details

    No phone number or email link on the homepage, so ready-to-buy visitors have one fewer way to reach you.

  • No risk reducer

    No guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card) is mentioned, which is often what tips a hesitant visitor.

  • About 1,972 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 1,972 words of visible text.

5 checks passed
  • Clear next step on the first screen

    On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Learn More →” and “Contact us”.

  • 12 calls to action

    The homepage has 12 calls to action, for example “Contact us”, “Contact” and “Download the Survey”.

  • 2 short forms

    2 short forms (1 field at most) are right on the homepage.

  • Social proof on the page

    Social proof on the homepage: 47 customer or partner logos, 1 trust badge and “0 + clients”.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.

Privacy and tracking

  • 2 trackers load before any consent

    2

    Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads and Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (Didomi) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.

  • 4 cookies set on arrival

    4

    Opening the homepage sets 4 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).

  • 7 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 7 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

1 checks passed
  • Consent tool: Didomi

    A consent management tool (Didomi) loads with the page.

Security, domain, email and software versions

The security, domain and email checks, software and plugin versions, and any app with a known security problem are visible only to people at artefact.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.

Upkeep, stack and company

Stack

CMS
WordPress
Framework
jQuery
Analytics
Google Tag Manager
Hosting
OVHcloud

Hiring

Hiring
149 open roles
Teams
Data Engineering (30), Data Consulting (28), Data Science (28), Consulting & Data (8)
Job board
greenhouse

Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 36 issues on artefact.com, including 19 speed issues, 3 SEO issues and 1 conversion gap. That is the website alone. The full Growth Playbook pairs these findings with what your customers say in public reviews and communities and what your closest competitors do better, then turns everything into at least 20 prioritised ideas, each with the evidence behind it, a step-by-step playbook, a metric and an owner.

  • 28 research agents read your site, reviews, competitors, communities and public filings
  • Customer review mining (G2, Capterra, Trustpilot and more) and voice-of-pain analysis in your buyers’ own words
  • Competitor intelligence with battlecards for your closest rivals
  • Ideal customer profile, buyer segments and buying-stage funnel
  • Ranked channels, outreach sequences and content angles
  • Live Reddit threads where buyers ask for what you sell, with draft replies
  • Earned media and PR openings
  • At least 20 ideas with evidence, a step-by-step playbook, metric, owner, effort and impact, grouped into this week, this quarter, big bets and wildcards, plus a 30/60/90-day roadmap
  • PDF, Markdown, CSV, Notion and Linear exports, and a shareable page your team can track progress on
  • Refresh the playbook later to see what changed

By continuing you agree to the Terms and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

Free requests are written in the order they come in, so it can take a while. Pay $25 and yours is ready within a few hours. Either way you get a shareable link and a PDF.

  • No subscription
  • Free, or $25 to skip the line
  • Money-back guarantee

14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.

Get the full playbook · $25