Website review, no card needed
esmil.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 27 October 202633 issues · 98 checks
This review found 33 issues worth fixing on esmil.com, 6 of them high impact, across 98 checks. The most urgent: reduce unused JavaScript. 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
83BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.1 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 103 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 103 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 103 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 101 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 101 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 101 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 104 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
Reduce unused JavaScript
6.3 s · 847 KiBAbout 847 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 6.3 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 55
55/100Your mobile performance score is 55 (desktop: 79). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Google CDN and Other Google APIs/SDKs and others), adding 1.8 MB and 734 ms of main-thread time.
Render-blocking requests
750 ms7 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 750 ms.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
400 ms · 336 KiB39 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (336 KiB).
Reduce unused CSS
300 ms · 66 KiBAbout 66 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
Google CDN adds 260 ms
260 msGoogle CDN costs a phone 260 ms of main-thread work and 779 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.
Google Tag Manager adds 267 ms
267 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 267 ms of main-thread work and 477 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.
Other Google APIs/SDKs adds 175 ms
175 msOther Google APIs/SDKs costs a phone 175 ms of main-thread work and 347 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.
6 long tasks on the main thread
6 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 130 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
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
4 KiB4 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.7 s
A phone's processor spends 1.7 s on main-thread work while loading, 994 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 1 ms
1 msYour server sent the HTML in 1 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
First Contentful Paint: 9.8 s
9.8 sThe first text or image appears after 9.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 16.6 s
16.6 sYour largest element takes 16.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “SMIL utilizes email and text notifications for scheduling, …”.
Time to Interactive: 16.6 s
16.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 16.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 9.8 s
9.8 sVisually, the page fills in at 9.8 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
14 images without width and height
14 images 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 103 ms to 104 ms 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: 1.2 s
1.2 sReal visitors wait 1.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 99 ms
99 msReal visitors wait 99 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: 1.1 s
1.1 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.1 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 531 ms
531 msReal visitors wait 531 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Largest content (LCP) got 29% faster for real visitors
-29%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.6 s to 1.1 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Total Blocking Time: 127 ms
127 msScripts block the page for only 127 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 2.4 MB in 89 requests
2.4 MBYour homepage downloads 2.4 MB in 89 requests on a phone: scripts 1.6 MB (22), other files 360 KiB (7) and images 330 KiB (40). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
About 0.7 g of CO₂ per visit
0.69 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.69 g of CO₂e: 83.3 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
14 text elements with low contrast
14 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 (10 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 10 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
6 form fields without a label
6 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
Headings should not be empty (1 element)
Headings should not be empty: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 22 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
30 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 33 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 30 passed and 3 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 (81 characters)
Your title is 81 characters, so Google will cut it off around 60: “SMIL Southwest Medical Imaging - Arizona Radiology and Diagnostic Medical Imaging”.
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.
Meta description is long (165 characters)
Your meta description is 165 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
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 X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
119 internal links, 23 external
The homepage links to 119 pages on esmil.com and 23 external pages.
3 checks passed
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “SMIL Southwest Medical Imaging”.
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.esmil.com/sitemap.xml.
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 (633 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 pages share a title
/locations/101-agua-fria.php and /locations/101-bell-rd.php all use the title “AZ 101 & BELL RD. - SMIL Southwest Medical Imaging Phoenix”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
2 pages without a meta description
/locations/101-agua-fria.php and /locations/101-bell-rd.php 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 96 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.
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
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
4 small tap targets
4 of 13 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
4 JavaScript errors while loading
4 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Access to XMLHttpRequest at 'https://www.google.com/cse/static/element/dc6f600a0d4404e5/default_v6+en.css' from origin …”.
1 low-resolution image
1 image is served at too low a resolution for sharp phone screens.
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 (esmil.com).
Valid certificate (17 days left)
The certificate from GoDaddy.com · GoDaddy TLS Intermediate CA DV - R1v1 verifies for esmil.com and is valid for another 17 days.
http:// redirects to https
http://esmil.com redirects to the secure version.
HTTP/2
The server speaks HTTP/2, so browsers load many files over one connection.
All 54 links work
All 54 links checked from your homepage (40 internal, 14 external) answered without errors.
Domain and trust
No CAA record
esmil.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
esmil.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 25 years old
25 yearsesmil.com was registered in Oct 2001 through GoDaddy.com, LLC. An established domain carries more trust with email providers and search engines.
Registered until Oct 2031
esmil.com is registered until Oct 2031.
Content and conversion
Only about 170 words
The homepage has only about 170 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
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.
5 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “SCHEDULE ONLINE”.
11 calls to action
The homepage has 11 calls to action, for example “SCHEDULE ONLINE”, “Schedule Online” and “Contact Us”.
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 1 testimonial or review block and 1 customer or partner logo.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 2 phone links and 1 email link.
Email authentication
Email authentication score: 90/100
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, and sends you reports.
SPF with a strict ending (-all)
An SPF record lists your sending servers and tells receivers to reject anything else: “v=spf1 include:spf.protection.outlook.com include:_spf.prod.hydra.sophos.com include:_spf.paubox.com -all”.
DKIM signing found
A DKIM key is published (selector “s2”), so receivers can verify mail really came from you.
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.
3 cookies set on arrival
3Opening the homepage sets 3 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.
19 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 19 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
Upkeep, stack and company
No signs of neglect in what was checked: the copyright year, CMS and plugin versions, and jQuery.
Stack
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Google Tag Manager
- Hosting
- GoDaddy
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 33 issues on esmil.com, including 14 speed issues, 5 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
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.