Website review, no card needed

ftec.com.br logo

ftec.com.br website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 3 November 202659 issues · 109 checks

This review found 59 issues worth fixing on ftec.com.br, 26 of them high impact, across 109 checks. The most urgent: use efficient cache lifetimes. 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

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
3.5 s3.2 sMay 16Oct 313.4 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 16, 20263.2 s
May 23, 20263.2 s
May 30, 20263.3 s
Jun 6, 20263.3 s
Jun 13, 20263.3 s
Jun 20, 20263.4 s
Jun 27, 20263.4 s
Jul 4, 20263.4 s
Jul 11, 20263.3 s
Jul 18, 20263.4 s
Jul 25, 20263.4 s
Aug 1, 20263.4 s
Aug 8, 20263.5 s
Aug 15, 20263.4 s
Aug 22, 20263.4 s
Aug 29, 20263.4 s
Sep 5, 20263.4 s
Sep 12, 20263.3 s
Sep 19, 20263.3 s
Sep 26, 20263.3 s
Oct 3, 20263.3 s
Oct 10, 20263.3 s
Oct 17, 20263.3 s
Oct 24, 20263.3 s
Oct 31, 20263.4 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
293 ms250 msMay 16Oct 31288 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 16, 2026263 ms
May 23, 2026257 ms
May 30, 2026263 ms
Jun 6, 2026260 ms
Jun 13, 2026261 ms
Jun 20, 2026266 ms
Jun 27, 2026261 ms
Jul 4, 2026261 ms
Jul 11, 2026263 ms
Jul 18, 2026265 ms
Jul 25, 2026271 ms
Aug 1, 2026267 ms
Aug 8, 2026267 ms
Aug 15, 2026263 ms
Aug 22, 2026261 ms
Aug 29, 2026262 ms
Sep 5, 2026255 ms
Sep 12, 2026259 ms
Sep 19, 2026256 ms
Sep 26, 2026261 ms
Oct 3, 2026272 ms
Oct 10, 2026281 ms
Oct 17, 2026287 ms
Oct 24, 2026285 ms
Oct 31, 2026288 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

Live view · interaction off

Speed

10 to fix9
  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    16.7 s · 5.4 MB

    22 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (5.4 MB).

  • Improve image delivery

    14.9 s · 4.7 MB

    17 images could be 4.7 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 14.9 s faster on a phone.

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    7.2 s · 1.1 MB

    About 1.1 MB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 7.2 s faster on a phone.

  • Mobile performance score: 9

    9/100

    Your mobile performance score is 9. Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.

  • Main-thread work: 4.1 s

    A phone's processor spends 4.1 s on main-thread work while loading, 2.4 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.

  • 8 third-party services on the page

    8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Google CDN and Facebook and others), adding 2.0 MB and 1.2 s of main-thread time.

  • Google Tag Manager adds 599 ms

    599 ms

    Google Tag Manager costs a phone 599 ms of main-thread work and 829 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 CDN adds 343 ms

    343 ms

    Google CDN costs a phone 343 ms of main-thread work and 742 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.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    350 ms · 34 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 34 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 350 ms faster on a phone.

  • 20 long tasks on the main thread

    20 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 263 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    150 ms · 33 KiB

    About 33 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.

  • 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: 12 ms

    12 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 12 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

13 to fix0
  • 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.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 41.6 s

    41.6 s

    Your largest element takes 41.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “Banner CPA”.

  • Time to Interactive: 42.3 s

    42.3 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 42.3 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Speed Index: 14.2 s

    14.2 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 14.2 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • First Contentful Paint: 6.5 s

    6.5 s

    The first text or image appears after 6.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.911

    0.911

    The layout shifts by 0.911 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.

  • Total Blocking Time: 992 ms

    992 ms

    Scripts block taps and scrolling for 992 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user LCP: 3.4 s

    3.4 s

    Real visitors wait 3.4 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 305 ms

    305 ms

    Real visitors wait 305 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.11

    0.11

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.11 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.9 s

    1.9 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.9 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 964 ms

    964 ms

    Real visitors wait 964 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • 2 images without width and height

    2 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.

  • Tap response (INP) got 10% slower for real visitors

    +10%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 263 ms to 288 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 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 3.2 s to 3.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

Images and page weight

4 to fix35
  • Page weight: 9.6 MB in 228 requests

    9.6 MB

    Your homepage downloads 9.6 MB in 228 requests on a phone: images 5.6 MB (29), scripts 3.3 MB (50) and other files 497 KiB (143). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • 1 image over 500 KB

    image_2026-10-21_172449246_1792614290307.png weighs 1.5 MB. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.

  • 2 images in older formats

    2 images (1.7 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.

  • 1 image far larger than shown

    105 KiB

    1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example Site C_pia de Frontlight Sa_de e est_tica _1684 x 504 px_ _P at 1,688 px wide, shown at 390 px. Resized copies would save about 105 KiB.

  • About 2.7 g of CO₂ per visit

    2.72 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 2.72 g of CO₂e: 326.5 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

1 checks passed
  • Images load when needed

    Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.

Accessibility

10 to fixGoogle 7886
  • 10 buttons without a name

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

  • Certain ARIA roles must contain particular children (1 element)

    Certain ARIA roles must contain particular children: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated critical by axe-core.

  • 25 text elements with low contrast

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

  • Malformed lists

    Some lists contain elements other than list items, which screen readers announce wrongly.

  • 3 tap targets too small

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

  • Scrollable region must have keyboard access (1 element)

    Scrollable region must have keyboard access: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.

  • Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)

    Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate 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.

  • 9 links without text

    9 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.

  • Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.

    Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (11 elements).

2 checks passed
  • Every image has alt text

    All 13 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 45 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 54 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 45 passed and 9 failed. 5 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

6 to fixGoogle 9170
  • No H1 headline

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

  • Title is short (14 characters)

    Your title is only 14 characters: “Uniftec Online”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.

  • 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 robots.txt

    There is no robots.txt at unifteconline.com.br/robots.txt, the first file search crawlers ask for.

  • 2 links with vague text

    2 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is set, so this is minor.

  • 24 internal links, 5 external

    The homepage links to 24 pages on ftec.com.br and 5 external pages.

3 checks passed
  • Meta description: 122 characters

    Your meta description is 122 characters: “Invista em você! Escolha os cursos da Uniftec Online. Técnico EAD. Graduação EAD. Pós-Graduação EAD. Cursos Livres Onli…”.

  • Open Graph tags complete

    Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.

  • XML sitemap found

    Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.unifteconline.com.br/sitemap.xml.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88
  • 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

    There is no robots.txt, so nothing stops the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity from reading the site and cite it in answers.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (347 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

4 to fix62
  • 1 linked page is broken

    Your homepage links to /politica-de-privacidade, which answers with an error. Visitors hit a dead end and search engines drop it.

  • 10 pages share a title

    /, /minha-conta, /carrinho, /cursos, /cursos-agrupados and /blog/uniftec-apresenta-projeto-de-inovacao-aeroespacial-em-reuniao-com-presidente-da-infraero and 4 others all use the title “Uniftec Online”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

  • 9 pages share a meta description

    /minha-conta, /carrinho, /cursos, /cursos-agrupados, /blog/uniftec-apresenta-projeto-de-inovacao-aeroespacial-em-reuniao-com-presidente-da-infraero and /blog/uniftec-participa-de-missao-territorios-inovadores-em-sao-paulo-e-campinas and 3 others use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.

  • 8 pages without an H1

    /minha-conta, /carrinho, /cursos-agrupados, /blog/uniftec-apresenta-projeto-de-inovacao-aeroespacial-em-reuniao-com-presidente-da-infraero, /blog/uniftec-participa-de-missao-territorios-inovadores-em-sao-paulo-e-campinas and /blog/professora-e-estudante-do-colegio-polyuni-representam-a-instituicao-em-mostra-cientifica-no-ceara and 2 others have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.

  • 10 pages with very little text

    /minha-conta, /carrinho, /cursos, /cursos-agrupados, /blog and /blog/uniftec-apresenta-projeto-de-inovacao-aeroespacial-em-reuniao-com-presidente-da-infraero and 4 others 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.

  • 12 internal pages checked

    We fetched 12 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.

4 checks passed
  • Canonical URLs point to themselves

    No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.

  • Every page has a meta description

    All 11 pages that loaded have a meta description.

  • No linked page is hidden from search

    None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.

  • Every page has a title

    All 11 pages that loaded have a <title>.

Best practices

2 to fixGoogle 9291
  • 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_TUNNEL_CONNECTION_FAILED”.

  • 1 distorted image

    1 image is displayed at the wrong aspect ratio, so it looks stretched or squashed.

  • Missing source maps

    Large scripts ship without source maps.

2 checks passed
  • Tap targets are thumb-sized

    52 of 61 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Security and trust

3 to fix71
  • 1 broken link to your own pages

    1 link from your homepage to your own site is broken, for example https://www.unifteconline.com.br/politica-de-privacidade (404).

  • 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.

4 checks passed
  • Served over HTTPS

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

  • Valid certificate (124 days left)

    The certificate from Amazon · Amazon RSA 2048 M01 verifies for ftec.com.br and is valid for another 124 days.

  • http:// redirects to https

    http://ftec.com.br 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.

Domain and trust

  • No CAA record

    unifteconline.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

    unifteconline.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 9 years old

    9 years

    unifteconline.com.br was registered in Jul 2017. An established domain carries more trust with email providers and search engines.

  • Registered until Jul 2027

    unifteconline.com.br is registered until Jul 2027.

Content and conversion

4 to fix42
  • 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 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 564 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 564 words of visible text.

2 checks passed
  • 2 short forms

    2 short forms (2 fields at most) are right on the homepage.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.

Email authentication

1 to fix75
  • DMARC is monitor-only (p=none)

    DMARC is set to p=none, so mail pretending to be ftec.com.br is still delivered. Reports are on, so moving to quarantine is the next step.

  • Email authentication score: 75/100

    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.

2 checks passed
  • 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:smtp.vtexcrm.com.br include:amazonses.com include:_spf.rdstation.com.…”.

  • DKIM signing found

    A DKIM key is published (selector “selector1”, “s1” and “s2”), so receivers can verify mail really came from you.

Privacy and tracking

1 to fix
  • 6 trackers load before any consent

    6

    Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Meta Pixel and Microsoft Clarity and 1 more (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.

  • 11 cookies set on arrival

    11

    Opening the homepage sets 11 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.

  • 21 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 21 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

Upkeep, stack and company

Stack

Framework
Next.js
Analytics
Google Tag Manager
Hosting
CloudFront

Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 59 issues on ftec.com.br, including 23 speed issues, 6 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