Website review, no card needed
atriumwindows.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 3 November 202626 issues · 78 checks
This review found 26 issues worth fixing on atriumwindows.com, 4 of them high impact, across 78 checks. The most urgent: improve image delivery. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.
- Homepage
- Phone render
- Links and pages
- Google PageSpeed
Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile
Site score
86BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 921 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 981 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 961 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 969 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 1.1 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 71 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 71 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 77 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 77 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 77 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 78 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 78 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 78 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 78 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 74 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 72 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 73 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 76 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 72 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 73 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 76 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 76 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
Speed
Improve image delivery
2.8 s · 758 KiB8 images could be 758 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.8 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 75
75/100Your mobile performance score is 75. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Render-blocking requests
900 ms1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 900 ms.
Reduce unused JavaScript
450 ms · 152 KiBAbout 152 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
Google Tag Manager adds 212 ms
212 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 212 ms of main-thread work and 295 KiB of downloads while your page loads. Loading it after the page is usable, or only on the pages that need it, takes that off the critical path.
5 third-party services on the page
5 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, jQuery CDN and FontAwesome CDN and others), adding 443 KiB and 234 ms of main-thread time.
2 long tasks on the main thread
2 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 134 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused CSS
12 KiBAbout 12 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.
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.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
4 KiB2 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (4 KiB).
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.5 s
A phone's processor spends 0.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 242 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 5 ms
5 msYour server sent the HTML in 5 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Largest Contentful Paint: 6.8 s
6.8 sYour largest element takes 6.8 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “WINDOWS THAT WORK AS HARD AS YOU DO”.
Time to Interactive: 6.9 s
6.9 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 6.9 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 1.8 s
1.8 sThe first text or image appears after 1.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
6 images without width and height
6 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
+6%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 71 ms to 76 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) got 11% slower for real visitors
+11%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 0.9 s to 1.1 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
9 checks passed
Passes Core Web Vitals for real visitors
Real Chrome users on phones pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)).
Real-user LCP: 1.3 s
1.3 sReal visitors wait 1.3 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 78 ms
78 msReal visitors wait 78 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.00
0.00For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 1.0 s
1.0 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 552 ms
552 msReal visitors wait 552 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Speed Index: 2.7 s
2.7 sVisually, the page fills in at 2.7 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.
Total Blocking Time: 104 ms
104 msScripts block the page for only 104 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.014
0.014The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.014, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
4 images far larger than shown
432 KiB4 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example idea-gallery-spd-int-1.jpg at 1,024 px wide, shown at 165 px. Resized copies would save about 432 KiB.
4 images in older formats
4 images (564 KiB) are JPEG, PNG or GIF. The same pictures as WebP or AVIF are usually much smaller at the same quality, and every current browser shows them.
About 0.4 g of CO₂ per visit
0.44 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.44 g of CO₂e: 52.9 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
2 checks passed
Page weight: 1.6 MB in 29 requests
1.6 MBYour homepage downloads 1.6 MB in 29 requests on a phone: images 1.0 MB (11), scripts 399 KiB (11) and fonts 104 KiB (3). That is a lean page.
Images load when needed
Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.
Accessibility
4 text elements with low contrast
4 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (8 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 8 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Document should not have more than one banner landmark (1 element)
Document should not have more than one banner landmark: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination (1 element)
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
1 form field without a label
1 form field has no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
1 link without text
1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 7 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
40 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 46 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 40 passed and 6 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
Title is long (70 characters)
Your title is 70 characters, so Google will cut it off around 60: “Atrium Windows & Doors | Manufacturer of Vinyl Windows and Patio Doors”.
3 links with vague text
3 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.
42 internal links, 3 external
The homepage links to 42 pages on atriumwindows.com and 3 external pages.
7 checks passed
Meta description: 155 characters
Your meta description is 155 characters: “Atrium manufactures energy efficient replacement windows, new-construction windows and patio doors designed to increase…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Windows that Work as Hard as You Do”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.atrium.com/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: Article, BreadcrumbList, ImageObject, Organization and Person.
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 and points crawlers to your sitemap.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.atrium.com/sitemap_index.xml.
AI search readiness
Organization data is thin (1 of 6 facts)
Your Organization JSON-LD is missing url, logo, sameAs (social profiles), 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.
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.atrium.com/llms.txt, a short Markdown guide to your key pages for AI tools (llmstxt.org). It is optional and few AI tools read it yet, so treat it as a cheap extra.
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 (225 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
5 pages without a meta description
https://www.atrium.com/support/care-maintenance, https://www.atrium.com/support/warranty-downloads, https://www.atrium.com/window-basics, https://www.atrium.com/window-basics/windows-buyers-guide and https://www.atrium.com/baba-letter have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 18 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
6 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 15 pages we checked loaded without an error.
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
Titles are unique
Every page we checked has its own title.
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 JavaScript errors while loading
2 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Access to XMLHttpRequest at 'https://use.fontawesome.com/releases/v4.7.0/css/font-awesome-css.min.css' from origin 'htt…”.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
12 of 14 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
No social proof
No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust you.
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.
Only about 183 words
The homepage has only about 183 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
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.
4 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “SHOP WINDOWS” and “SHOP PATIO DOORS”.
10 calls to action
The homepage has 10 calls to action, for example “Request Service”, “Contact Us” and “Shop Windows”.
1 short form
A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Privacy and tracking
3 trackers load before any consent
3Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). No consent tool was detected. Visitors from the EU, UK and several US states must be asked first.
4 cookies set on arrival
4Opening the homepage sets 4 cookies, 1 of them by other companies (measured from a US location before any click).
No consent tool detected
No known cookie consent tool loads with the page. Some sites build their own banner, and some only show one to visitors from the EU.
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.
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 atriumwindows.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
- Cloudflare
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 26 issues on atriumwindows.com, including 9 speed issues, 2 SEO issues and 3 conversion gaps. 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
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.