Website review, no card needed
ejam.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 20 October 202630 issues · 93 checks
This review found 30 issues worth fixing on ejam.com, 10 of them high impact, across 93 checks. The most urgent: use efficient cache lifetimes. 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
68DClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.8 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 78 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 72 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 73 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 71 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
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1.3 s · 4.7 MB19 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (4.7 MB).
Render-blocking requests
2.7 s8 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 2.7 s.
Mobile performance score: 45
45/100Your mobile performance score is 45 (desktop: 73). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Improve image delivery
500 ms · 223 KiB4 images could be 223 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 500 ms faster on a phone.
7 third-party services on the page
7 third-party services load with your homepage (cloudfront.net, Cloudflare and Google CDN and others), adding 484 KiB and 44 ms of main-thread time.
1 long task on the main thread
1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 71 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Legacy JavaScript
18 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 18 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
Phones get a much slower page than desktops
Desktop scores 73 but mobile only 45. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.
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.
Minify CSS
5 KiB5 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.9 s
A phone's processor spends 0.9 s on main-thread work while loading, 371 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 2 ms
2 msYour server sent the HTML in 2 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.814
0.814The layout shifts by 0.814 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.
Largest Contentful Paint: 5.9 s
5.9 sYour largest element takes 5.9 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the element shown below.
First Contentful Paint: 3.9 s
3.9 sThe first text or image appears after 3.9 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Time to Interactive: 5.9 s
5.9 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 5.9 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 3.9 s
3.9 sVisually, the page fills in at 3.9 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 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
-4%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 78 ms to 71 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-4%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.7 s to 1.8 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Not enough real-visitor data yet
Chrome's UX Report (opens in a new tab) has too little real-visitor traffic for this site, so the figures here are lab measurements from Google's test phone on a throttled 4G connection.
1 checks passed
Total Blocking Time: 0 ms
0 msScripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
Page weight: 7.2 MB in 33 requests
7.2 MBYour homepage downloads 7.2 MB in 33 requests on a phone: media 6.1 MB (3), images 744 KiB (11) and fonts 162 KiB (7). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
About 2.0 g of CO₂ per visit
2.03 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 2.03 g of CO₂e: 243.7 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
<html> element must have a lang attribute (1 element)
<html> element must have a lang attribute: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (1 element)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
1 link without text
1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.
No page language
The <html> element has no lang attribute, so screen readers may read the page in the wrong voice and accent.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 16 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
36 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 39 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 36 passed and 3 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No meta description
No meta description, so Google writes its own snippet from whatever text it finds.
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.
No XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at https://ejam.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
5 internal links, 1 external
The homepage links to 5 pages on ejam.com and 1 external page.
3 checks passed
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “At eJam, we create innovative, Earth-conscious brands that make life better.”.
Title: 34 characters
Your title is a healthy 34 characters: “ejam | Next-Gen Ecommerce Platform”.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
AI search readiness
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.
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 (349 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
3 pages without a meta description
/careers, /about and /contact-us have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
1 page with very little text
/contact-us has under 150 words in the HTML. Thin pages rarely rank; if the text loads with JavaScript, crawlers that don't run it see even less.
3 internal pages checked
We fetched 3 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
6 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 3 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 3 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
1 JavaScript error while loading
1 error was logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Failed to load resource: net::ERR_FAILED”.
1 checks passed
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Security and trust
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 clickjacking protection
Neither X-Frame-Options nor a CSP frame-ancestors policy is set, so any site can embed yours in a frame.
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 (ejam.com).
Valid certificate (31 days left)
The certificate from Google Trust Services · WE1 verifies for ejam.com and is valid for another 31 days.
http:// redirects to https
http://ejam.com redirects to the secure version.
HTTP/2 and HTTP/3
The server speaks HTTP/2 and advertises HTTP/3, so browsers load many files over one connection.
All 5 links work
All 5 links checked from your homepage (4 internal, 1 external) answered without errors.
Domain and trust
No CAA record
ejam.com 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
ejam.com'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 28 years old
28 yearsejam.com was registered in Sep 1998 through eNom, LLC. An established domain carries more trust with email providers and search engines.
Registered until Sep 2027
ejam.com is registered until Sep 2027.
Content and conversion
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.
Local business without LocalBusiness data
Your homepage shows a street address but no LocalBusiness JSON-LD, so Google and AI assistants have to guess your address, hours and phone from the page text.
No phone number on the homepage
A local customer looking to call finds no phone number on the homepage. Add one, ideally as a tap-to-call link.
Thin social proof
Social proof on the homepage: 8 customer or partner logos. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.
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 opening hours
The homepage shows no opening hours. If customers visit or call, show when.
No form on the homepage
There is no form on the homepage, so every lead has to click through to another page first.
No map or directions link
There is no link to Google or Apple Maps. A directions link is one tap for a phone visitor.
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 344 words of copy
The homepage carries about 344 words of visible text.
2 checks passed
1 call to action
The homepage has 1 call to action, for example “Contact”.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Cloudflare Web Analytics.
Email authentication
Email authentication score: 95/100
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: reject
DMARC tells receivers to reject mail that fails authentication, and sends you reports.
SPF in place (~all)
An SPF record lists your sending servers and marks other mail as suspicious (~all): “v=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all”.
DKIM signing found
A DKIM key is published (selector “google”), so receivers can verify mail really came from you.
Privacy and tracking
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.
8 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 8 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
No known trackers before consent
No known advertising or analytics trackers load before a visitor clicks anything (measured from a US location before any click).
Upkeep, stack and company
- The footer still says © 2024.
Stack
- CMS
- Webflow
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This free review found 30 issues on ejam.com, including 10 speed issues, 5 SEO issues and 5 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.