Website review, no card needed

constance.com.br logo

constance.com.br website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 29 October 202636 issues · 74 checks

This review found 36 issues worth fixing on constance.com.br, 15 of them high impact, across 74 checks. The most urgent: fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors. Google's speed test didn't respond, so speed is not measured here; your full playbook measures it. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.

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

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

Site score

Not scored yet: Google's speed test didn't run in this review. Re-run the review to get a score.

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
3.2 s2.7 sMay 9Oct 243.2 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20262.8 s
May 16, 20262.8 s
May 23, 20262.9 s
May 30, 20262.9 s
Jun 6, 20262.9 s
Jun 13, 20262.9 s
Jun 20, 20262.8 s
Jun 27, 20262.8 s
Jul 4, 20262.8 s
Jul 11, 20262.7 s
Jul 18, 20262.8 s
Jul 25, 20262.8 s
Aug 1, 20262.8 s
Aug 8, 20262.8 s
Aug 15, 20262.8 s
Aug 22, 20262.8 s
Aug 29, 20262.9 s
Sep 5, 20262.9 s
Sep 12, 20263.0 s
Sep 19, 20262.9 s
Sep 26, 20262.9 s
Oct 3, 20262.9 s
Oct 10, 20263.0 s
Oct 17, 20263.1 s
Oct 24, 20263.2 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
282 ms257 msMay 9Oct 24270 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 2026277 ms
May 16, 2026266 ms
May 23, 2026261 ms
May 30, 2026260 ms
Jun 6, 2026260 ms
Jun 13, 2026262 ms
Jun 20, 2026270 ms
Jun 27, 2026272 ms
Jul 4, 2026275 ms
Jul 11, 2026277 ms
Jul 18, 2026274 ms
Jul 25, 2026274 ms
Aug 1, 2026273 ms
Aug 8, 2026273 ms
Aug 15, 2026277 ms
Aug 22, 2026279 ms
Aug 29, 2026279 ms
Sep 5, 2026279 ms
Sep 12, 2026277 ms
Sep 19, 2026274 ms
Sep 26, 2026272 ms
Oct 3, 2026270 ms
Oct 10, 2026270 ms
Oct 17, 2026271 ms
Oct 24, 2026270 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

No screenshot is available for this review.

Speed

Not measured in this review.

Core Web Vitals

6 to fix0
  • Fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors

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

  • Real-user CLS: 0.71

    0.71

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.71 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user LCP: 3.2 s

    3.2 s

    Real visitors wait 3.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 270 ms

    270 ms

    Real visitors wait 270 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user FCP: 2.2 s

    2.2 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 2.2 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.5 s

    1.5 s

    Real visitors wait 1.5 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • 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 277 ms to 270 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) got 12% slower for real visitors

    +12%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.8 s to 3.2 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

Images and page weight

1 to fix70
  • Page weight: 5.3 MB

    5.3 MB

    Your homepage downloads 5.3 MB on a phone, 1.8 MB of it images (34%). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • About 1.5 g of CO₂ per visit

    1.51 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.51 g of CO₂e: 181.4 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

9 to fix87
  • 2 buttons without a name

    2 buttons have no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.

  • 21 tap targets too small

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

  • 10 text elements with low contrast

    10 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.

  • Hidden but focusable

    2 elements hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.

  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (28 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 28 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • Heading levels should only increase by one (1 element)

    Heading levels should only increase by one: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • No main landmark

    The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.

  • 8 links without text

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

  • 4 form fields without a label

    4 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.

1 checks passed
  • 40 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 48 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 40 passed and 8 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

8 to fix51
  • No page title

    Your page has no <title>, so Google has to invent the blue link in search results.

  • No meta description

    No meta description, so Google writes its own snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • No H1 headline

    There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.

  • No structured data

    No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.

  • No canonical URL

    No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image (also missing: og:title, og:description), so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • Only 0 internal links

    The homepage links to only 0 pages on your own site, so visitors and crawlers find few routes into the rest of it.

  • No favicon declared

    No favicon is declared in the HTML, so browser tabs and Google's mobile results may show a generic icon.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.

2 checks passed
  • 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.constance.com.br/sitemap.xml.

AI search readiness

2 to fix63
  • Most text only appears after JavaScript runs

    0%

    A phone browser shows 255 words, but the HTML your server sends has only 0. GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot read that HTML without running JavaScript, so they see an almost empty page. Server-side rendering or pre-rendering fixes it.

  • No Organization structured data

    There is no Organization (or LocalBusiness) JSON-LD, so search engines and AI assistants have no machine-readable facts about who runs the site: its name, logo, profiles and contact details.

  • No llms.txt

    There is no /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.

  • Opted out of AI training for 5 crawlers

    robots.txt blocks GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended, Applebot-Extended and CCBot, which collect pages to train models. That's a legitimate choice and doesn't by itself stop the site appearing in AI answers, which the crawlers above handle.

1 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.

Best practices

3 to fix71
  • 1 broken image

    1 image failed to load on a phone, for example https://bat.bing.com/action/0?ti=97027203&tm=gtm002&Ver=2&mid=3d9162e9-5ffc-4c17-b780-e601d8c672b4&bo=1&sid=55cd6190d3be11f1a7630d66d62ee253&vid=55cdb4c0d3be11f182d5eb956bf3dede&vids=1&msclkid=N&pi=91.

  • 85 small tap targets

    85 of 113 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

  • 6 JavaScript errors while loading

    6 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “account_id is not defined”.

1 checks passed
  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Security and trust

2 to fix86
  • No HSTS header

    No Strict-Transport-Security header, so browsers may still try plain http first on a return visit.

  • No Content-Security-Policy

    No Content-Security-Policy header, the main browser-side defence against injected scripts.

  • No X-Content-Type-Options

    X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff is missing, so browsers may guess file types.

  • No Referrer-Policy

    No Referrer-Policy header, so full URLs can leak to the sites you link to.

  • No Permissions-Policy

    No Permissions-Policy header to switch off camera, microphone and location for embedded content.

  • No security.txt

    There is no /.well-known/security.txt telling researchers how to report a security problem to you.

5 checks passed
  • Served over HTTPS

    The homepage is served over HTTPS (constance.com.br).

  • Valid certificate (67 days left)

    The certificate from Google Trust Services · WE1 verifies for constance.com.br and is valid for another 67 days.

  • Protected from clickjacking

    X-Frame-Options or a frame-ancestors policy stops other sites framing yours.

  • http:// redirects to https

    http://constance.com.br redirects to the secure version.

  • HTTP/2

    The server speaks HTTP/2, so browsers load many files over one connection.

Domain and trust

  • No CAA record

    constance.com.br has no CAA record, so any certificate authority may issue a certificate for it. A CAA record naming your provider (for example letsencrypt.org) closes that door.

  • DNSSEC is off

    constance.com.br's DNS answers are not signed. DNSSEC stops attackers forging them to send visitors or email elsewhere; most registrars switch it on in a click, though most sites still run without it.

2 checks passed
  • Domain is 21 years old

    21 years

    constance.com.br was registered in Sep 2005. An established domain carries more trust with email providers and search engines.

  • Registered until Sep 2034

    constance.com.br is registered until Sep 2034.

Content and conversion

4 to fix30
  • No call to action on the first screen

    On a phone, there is no call to action on the first screen: visitors have to scroll to find out what to do next.

  • No calls to action

    We found no call-to-action buttons or links (such as “Book a demo” or “Get a quote”) anywhere on the homepage.

  • 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.

  • No form on the homepage

    There is no form on the homepage, so every lead has to click through to another page first.

  • 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 255 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 255 words of visible text.

1 checks passed
  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager, Meta Pixel, Hotjar, TikTok Pixel and Cloudflare Web Analytics.

Email authentication

85
  • Email authentication score: 85/100

    Email authentication: SPF record 25 points, plus 15 when it ends in -all (10 for ~all); DMARC record 25, plus 25 for a reject policy (15 for quarantine); a DKIM key on a common selector 10.

3 checks passed
  • DMARC policy: quarantine

    DMARC tells receivers to quarantine mail that fails authentication.

  • SPF in place (~all)

    An SPF record lists your sending servers and marks other mail as suspicious (~all): “v=spf1 a mx ip4:159.183.172.204 include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:sendgrid.net include:mail.zendesk.com includ…”.

  • DKIM signing found

    A DKIM key is published (selector “selector1”, “k1” and “s1”), so receivers can verify mail really came from you.

Privacy and tracking

1 to fix
  • 8 trackers load before any consent

    8

    Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Hotjar and Meta Pixel and 3 mores (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.

  • 36 cookies set on arrival

    36

    Opening the homepage sets 36 cookies (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.

  • 44 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 44 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

Upkeep, stack and company

Stack

Framework
React
Analytics
Google Tag Manager | Hotjar
Hosting
Cloudflare

Company

Founded
2003
Headquarters
Serra

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 constance.com.br, including 6 speed issues, 8 SEO issues and 4 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

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