Website review, no card needed
enfabebe.pe website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 13 November 202630 issues · 65 checks
This review found 30 issues worth fixing on enfabebe.pe, 13 of them high impact, across 65 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
74C- #76,973 of 109,350 reviewed websitesbeats 26%
- #48,456 of 61,859 online storesbeats 18%
- #45,606 of 56,401 Shopify storesbeats 16%
Closest competitors among Shopify stores
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 23, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 4.1 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 3.8 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 3.8 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 3.5 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 3.5 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Nov 7, 2026 | 3.1 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 23, 2026 | 178 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 176 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 178 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 171 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 158 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 150 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 151 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 154 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 160 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 173 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 162 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 165 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 160 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 163 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 161 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 146 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 152 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 139 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 139 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 149 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 149 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 149 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 136 ms |
| Nov 7, 2026 | 136 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
How it loaded on a phone
0.4 s
0.8 s
1.1 s
1.5 s
1.9 s
2.3 s
2.6 s
3.0 s
Speed
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1.8 s · 392 KiB18 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (392 KiB).
Reduce unused JavaScript
1.0 s · 288 KiBAbout 288 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.0 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 56
56/100Your mobile performance score is 56. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Render-blocking requests
750 ms1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 750 ms.
6 third-party services on the page
6 third-party services load with your homepage (Optanon, TikTok and Google Tag Manager and others), adding 1.2 MB and 373 ms of main-thread time.
Improve image delivery
380 KiB8 images could be 380 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
Legacy JavaScript
300 ms · 49 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 49 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
contentstack.com adds 0 ms
0 mscontentstack.com costs a phone 0 ms of main-thread work and 476 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 long tasks on the main thread
5 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 86 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused CSS
71 KiBAbout 71 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.
Forced reflow
Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.4 s
A phone's processor spends 1.4 s on main-thread work while loading, 688 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 118 ms
118 msYour server sent the HTML in 118 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
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.
First Contentful Paint: 9.7 s
9.7 sThe first text or image appears after 9.7 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 18.2 s
18.2 sYour largest element takes 18.2 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Somos una comunidad de mamás y papás como tú, que buscan ma…”.
Time to Interactive: 20.8 s
20.8 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 20.8 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 9.7 s
9.7 sVisually, the page fills in at 9.7 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Real-user LCP: 3.1 s
3.1 sReal visitors wait 3.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 2.0 s
2.0 sReal visitors see the first content after 2.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 1.2 s
1.2 sReal visitors wait 1.2 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
6 checks passed
Real-user INP: 133 ms
133 msReal visitors wait 133 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.
Tap response (INP) got 23% faster for real visitors
-23%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-11-07, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 178 ms to 136 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) got 20% faster for real visitors
-20%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-11-07, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 4.2 s to 3.1 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 53 ms
53 msScripts block the page for only 53 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
Page weight: 3.8 MB in 56 requests
3.8 MBYour homepage downloads 3.8 MB in 56 requests on a phone: HTML 1.6 MB (1), other files 915 KiB (18) and scripts 789 KiB (19). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded
enfabebe_pe_Header_image.jpeg is on the first screen but marked loading="lazy", so the browser waits before fetching it and the page looks finished later. Load it eagerly (and give it fetchpriority="high" if it is the main image).
About 1.1 g of CO₂ per visit
1.07 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.07 g of CO₂e: 128.5 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
2 checks passed
Images use modern formats
Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
Links must have discernible text (1 element)
Links must have discernible text: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious 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.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (5 elements).
1 checks passed
44 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: 44 passed and 2 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No H1 headline
There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.
Structured data has 1 problem
Structured data found (untyped) but with 1 problem, for example “ld+json block 1 is not valid JSON (Unexpected end of JSON input)”.
No social preview image
No Open Graph image (also missing: og:description), so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.
Only 2 internal links
The homepage links to only 2 pages on your own site, so visitors and crawlers find few routes into the rest of it.
5 checks passed
Meta description: 153 characters
Your meta description is 153 characters: “EnfaBebé Perú te ofrece fórmulas infantiles Enfamil®, Enfagrow®, junto a consejos de embarazo, desarrollo infantil y en…”.
Title: 37 characters
Your title is a healthy 37 characters: “Fórmulas, embarazo y cuidado del bebé”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.clubenfabebe.com//.
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.clubenfabebe.com/pe/sitemap-0.xml.
AI search readiness
Most text only appears after JavaScript runs
0%A phone browser shows 301 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.
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.
llms.txt published
The site publishes https://www.clubenfabebe.com/llms.txt (1 KiB, 0 links, though it should open with a “# Title” line), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.
Best practices
3 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Tap targets are thumb-sized
17 of 18 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
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.
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 301 words of copy
The homepage carries about 301 words of visible text.
1 checks passed
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 Tag Manager, Meta Pixel and TikTok Pixel (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (OneTrust) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
6 cookies set on arrival
6Opening the homepage sets 6 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
10 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 10 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: OneTrust
A consent management tool (OneTrust) 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 enfabebe.pe, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
- The footer still says © 2025.
Stack
- Framework
- Gatsby
- E-commerce
- 10 Shopify Products;Shopify;Shopify Plus
- Analytics
- Google Tag Manager
- Hosting
- AWS
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 30 issues on enfabebe.pe, including 16 speed issues, 4 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
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.