Website review, no card needed
genepharm.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 30 October 202633 issues · 79 checks
This review found 33 issues worth fixing on genepharm.com, 9 of them high impact, across 79 checks. The most urgent: render-blocking requests. 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
79CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 2.2 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 96 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 96 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 92 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 92 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 92 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 91 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 90 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 97 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 93 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 95 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 92 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 92 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 90 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
0.6 s
1.1 s
1.7 s
2.3 s
2.8 s
3.4 s
3.9 s
4.5 s
Speed
Render-blocking requests
1.9 s7 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.9 s.
Mobile performance score: 89
89/100Your mobile performance score is 89. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused CSS
460 ms · 89 KiBAbout 89 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 460 ms faster on a phone.
Font display
200 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 200 ms).
Reduce unused JavaScript
150 ms · 30 KiBAbout 30 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
Improve image delivery
63 KiB3 images could be 63 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
1 long task on the main thread
1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 50 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.
1 third-party service on the page
1 third-party service load with your homepage (JSDelivr CDN), adding 2 KiB and 0 ms of main-thread time.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.5 s
A phone's processor spends 0.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 143 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 4 ms
4 msYour server sent the HTML in 4 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 TTFB: 913 ms
913 msReal visitors wait 913 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Speed Index: 4.6 s
4.6 sVisually, the page fills in at 4.6 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 3.1 s
3.1 sYour largest element takes 3.1 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Please read our Cookies Policy for more information. ✅ Stri…”. Most of its time is element render delay (2.6 s).
First Contentful Paint: 2.0 s
2.0 sThe first text or image appears after 2.0 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
3 images without width and height
3 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-8%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 96 ms to 90 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+2%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.2 s to 2.2 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
7 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 2.1 s
2.1 sReal visitors wait 2.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 89 ms
89 msReal visitors wait 89 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: 1.5 s
1.5 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.5 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Time to Interactive: 3.2 s
3.2 sThe page is fully interactive after 3.2 s.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
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
About 0.1 g of CO₂ per visit
0.15 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.15 g of CO₂e: 18.0 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
4 checks passed
Page weight: 541 KiB in 30 requests
541 KiBYour homepage downloads 541 KiB in 30 requests on a phone: images 277 KiB (12), scripts 107 KiB (10) and stylesheets 94 KiB (3). That is a lean page.
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
6 text elements with low contrast
6 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
ARIA dialog and alertdialog nodes should have an accessible name (1 element)
ARIA dialog and alertdialog nodes should have an accessible name: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
Links look like plain text
1 link inside paragraphs relies on colour alone to stand out.
3 images without alt text
3 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (7 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 7 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
7 links without text
7 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
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), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
41 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 49 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 41 passed and 8 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.
Title is short (9 characters)
Your title is only 9 characters: “Home (en)”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
3 H1 headlines
There are 3 <h1> headlines (“Production Capacity”, “Therapeutic Areas” and “Global Presence”). One clear main headline is easier for people and search engines.
No canonical URL
No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.
Structured data has 3 problems
Structured data found (Article, Organization, WebPage and WebSite) but with 3 problems, for example “Article: image is not an absolute URL ("images/yootheme/home.jpg")”.
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://www.genepharm.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
1 link with vague text
1 link use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind it.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
45 internal links, 11 external
The homepage links to 45 pages on genepharm.com and 11 external pages.
1 checks passed
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
AI search readiness
Organization data is thin (2 of 6 facts)
Your Organization JSON-LD is missing logo, sameAs (social profiles), description and contact details. These are the facts AI assistants use to describe a business and to tell it apart from others with a similar name.
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.genepharm.com/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 (289 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
15 pages without a meta description
https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/about-us, https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/products/greek-market, https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/products/international-market/csr, https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/products/international-market/career, https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/activities and https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/research-development/research-development and 9 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
1 page without an H1
https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/global has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
2 pages with very little text
https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/en/global and https://www.genepharm.com/index.php/el 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.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 19 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.
Titles are unique
Every page we checked has its own title.
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
5 small tap targets
5 of 9 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
2 JavaScript errors while loading
2 errors were 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.
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 social proof
No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust you.
No analytics detected
No analytics or tag manager detected in the HTML, so you can't measure whether any of these fixes work.
Only about 242 words
The homepage has only about 242 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
Phone number is not tap-to-call
Your phone number appears as text but isn't a tel: link, so phone visitors can't tap to call.
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.
2 checks passed
1 call to action
The homepage has 1 call to action, for example “Contact”.
2 short forms
2 short forms (1 field at most) are right on the homepage.
Privacy and tracking
1 cookie set on arrival
1Opening the homepage sets 1 cookie (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.
1 other company contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 1 host 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).
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 genepharm.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- CMS
- Joomla
- Hosting
- DigitalOcean
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 genepharm.com, including 9 speed issues, 8 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.