Website review, no card needed
evertonfc.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 26 October 202645 issues · 92 checks
This review found 45 issues worth fixing on evertonfc.com, 22 of them high impact, across 92 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
74CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 5.0 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 5.0 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 5.0 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 4.7 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 4.6 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 4.5 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 4.6 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 4.7 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 4.8 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 4.9 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 5.1 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 5.0 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 5.0 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 4.5 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 178 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 179 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 179 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 179 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 176 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 164 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 162 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 160 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 159 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 162 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 159 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 159 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 160 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 163 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 167 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 170 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 170 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 168 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 169 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 167 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 166 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 165 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 145 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 141 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 139 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
Improve image delivery
1.8 s · 6.7 MB27 images could be 6.7 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.8 s faster on a phone.
Reduce unused JavaScript
1.4 s · 335 KiBAbout 335 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.4 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
1.5 s2 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.5 s.
Mobile performance score: 43
43/100Your mobile performance score is 43 (desktop: 58). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (cdn-cookieyes.com, userway.org and veritonic.com and others), adding 49.6 MB and 115 ms of main-thread time.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
2.7 MB16 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (2.7 MB).
mux.com adds 0 ms
0 msmux.com costs a phone 0 ms of main-thread work and 27.2 MB 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.
evertonfcservices.co.uk adds 0 ms
0 msevertonfcservices.co.uk costs a phone 0 ms of main-thread work and 22.2 MB 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.
Reduce unused CSS
450 ms · 111 KiBAbout 111 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
Main-thread work: 4.0 s
A phone's processor spends 4.0 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.6 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
2,771 HTML elements
The page has 2,771 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.
14 long tasks on the main thread
14 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 239 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Legacy JavaScript
11 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 11 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
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.
1 checks passed
Server response: 13 ms
13 msYour server sent the HTML in 13 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.
Real-user LCP: 5.2 s
5.2 sReal visitors wait 5.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 3.6 s
3.6 sReal visitors see the first content after 3.6 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 60.7 s
60.7 sYour largest element takes 60.7 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
Time to Interactive: 65.1 s
65.1 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 65.1 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 6.1 s
6.1 sThe first text or image appears after 6.1 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Speed Index: 11.6 s
11.6 sVisually, the page fills in at 11.6 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Total Blocking Time: 509 ms
509 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 509 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
2 images without width and height
2 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-3%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 4.8 s to 4.5 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
5 checks passed
Real-user INP: 174 ms
174 msReal visitors wait 174 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.07
0.07For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.07 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user TTFB: 482 ms
482 msReal visitors wait 482 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Tap response (INP) got 22% faster for real visitors
-22%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 178 ms to 139 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.035
0.035The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.035, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 51.8 MB in 257 requests
51.8 MBYour homepage downloads 51.8 MB in 257 requests on a phone: images 49.3 MB (99), other files 1.2 MB (97) and scripts 894 KiB (52). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
2 images over 500 KB
2 images weigh 6.7 MB together. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.
20 images far larger than shown
4.0 MB20 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example f7ee6900-c6f5-11f1-9f30-a3a0bd66a568.png at 1,600 px wide, shown at 358 px. Resized copies would save about 4.0 MB.
40 images in older formats
40 images (14.9 MB) 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.
34 images below the first screen load straight away
34 images further down the page (13.6 MB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 14.7 g of CO₂ per visit
14.68 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 14.68 g of CO₂e: 1761.1 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
Certain ARIA roles must be contained by particular parents (14 elements)
Certain ARIA roles must be contained by particular parents: 14 elements on the page fail this check, rated critical by axe-core.
1 button without a name
1 button has no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.
ARIA tab nodes must have an accessible name (8 elements)
ARIA tab nodes must have an accessible name: 8 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes (3 elements)
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes: 3 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
<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.
Interactive controls must not be nested (1 element)
Interactive controls must not be nested: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
10 images without alt text
10 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
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.
21 links without text
21 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Hidden but focusable
11 elements hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.
1 tap target too small
1 tap target is too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
No page language
The <html> element has no lang attribute, so screen readers may read the page in the wrong voice and accent.
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.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h1 → h3, h1 → h3 and h1 → h3), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
36 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: 36 passed and 10 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
6 H1 headlines
There are 6 <h1> headlines (“Everton FC”, “UPCOMING MATCHES” and “V”). One clear main headline is easier for people and search engines.
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.
76 internal links, 36 external
The homepage links to 76 pages on evertonfc.com and 36 external pages.
6 checks passed
Meta description: 84 characters
Your meta description is 84 characters: “The official Everton website, home of latest news, fixtures and live match coverage.”.
Title: 45 characters
Your title is a healthy 45 characters: “Everton Football Club - Everton Football Club”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.evertonfc.com/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: WebPage.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.evertonfc.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 (796 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
4 pages share a meta description
/news, /matches, /teams and /videos use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
2 pages with very little text
/tickets and /teams have 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.
7 pages slow to respond
/videos, /news/2026/october/25/highlights-everton-women-2-3-aston-villa, /news/2026/october/24/highlights--arsenal-2-0-everton, /news/2026/october/24/everton-defeated-at-arsenal, /news/2026/october/21/Everton-Giant-Ferguson-Surprises-60-Year-NHS-Stalwart-Sheila- and /news/2026/october/24/live-blog--arsenal-v-everton and 1 other took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 66 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
7 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 a meta description
All 15 pages that loaded have a meta description.
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 “[Veritonic] IP lookup failed with status 0”.
Missing source maps
Large scripts ship without source maps.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
14 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 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 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 383 words of copy
The homepage carries about 383 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
3 calls to action
The homepage has 3 calls to action, for example “SUBSCRIBE NOW”, “Buy Tickets” and “Contact Us”.
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 1 customer or partner logo and 4 trust badges.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Privacy and tracking
2 cookies set on arrival
2Opening the homepage sets 2 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
11 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 11 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
2 checks passed
Consent tool: CookieYes
A consent management tool (CookieYes) loads with the page.
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).
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 evertonfc.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Framework
- Nuxt
- Hosting
- AWS
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 45 issues on evertonfc.com, including 20 speed issues, 2 SEO issues and 2 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.