Website review, no card needed
interbevgroup.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 1 November 202621 issues · 74 checks
This review found 21 issues worth fixing on interbevgroup.com, 5 of them high impact, across 74 checks. The most urgent: 1 image over 500 KB. 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
89BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 960 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 969 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 963 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.5 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 67 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 67 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 69 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 69 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 70 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 68 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 66 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 61 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 59 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 63 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 64 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 65 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 59 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 63 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 63 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 66 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 70 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 64 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 64 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
2.9 MB21 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (2.9 MB).
Mobile performance score: 85
85/100Your mobile performance score is 85. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Render-blocking requests
750 ms3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 750 ms.
1 long task on the main thread
1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 62 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused JavaScript
40 KiBAbout 40 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page.
Minify JavaScript
21 KiB21 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
Reduce unused CSS
17 KiBAbout 17 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.
1 third-party service on the page
1 third-party service load with your homepage (Adobe TypeKit), adding 87 KiB and 0 ms of main-thread time.
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.
Minify CSS
3 KiB3 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.4 s
A phone's processor spends 0.4 s on main-thread work while loading, 127 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 41 ms
41 msYour server sent the HTML in 41 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Speed Index: 9.3 s
9.3 sVisually, the page fills in at 9.3 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Time to Interactive: 10.8 s
10.8 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 10.8 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Largest content (LCP) got 41% slower for real visitors
+41%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.1 s to 1.5 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
First Contentful Paint: 2.5 s
2.5 sThe first text or image appears after 2.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 2.5 s
2.5 sYour largest element takes 2.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “To visit our website, you must be of an age at which the pu…”. Most of its time is element render delay (1.6 s).
6 images without width and height
6 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-4%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 67 ms to 64 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
8 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: 1.5 s
1.5 sReal visitors wait 1.5 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 63 ms
63 msReal visitors wait 63 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: 1.2 s
1.2 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.2 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 529 ms
529 msReal visitors wait 529 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 6 ms
6 msScripts block the page for only 6 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
1 image over 500 KB
230923_CD_001_(1)_fullscreen.webp weighs 608 KiB. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.
11 images far larger than shown
1,018 KiB11 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example 230923_CD_001_(1)_fullscreen.webp at 1,280 px wide, shown at 323 px. Resized copies would save about 1,018 KiB.
Page weight: 3.0 MB in 31 requests
3.0 MBYour homepage downloads 3.0 MB in 31 requests on a phone: images 2.9 MB (20), fonts 86 KiB (3) and scripts 75 KiB (1). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
11 images below the first screen load straight away
11 images further down the page (2.1 MB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 0.9 g of CO₂ per visit
0.86 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.86 g of CO₂e: 103.5 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Images use modern formats
Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.
Accessibility
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.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h1 → h4 and h2 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 20 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
36 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 38 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 36 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 structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
Meta description is long (177 characters)
Your meta description is 177 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
36 internal links, 8 external
The homepage links to 36 pages on interbevgroup.com and 8 external pages.
6 checks passed
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “International Beverage”.
Title: 63 characters
Your title is a healthy 63 characters: “International Beverage Group | A global family of drinks brands”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.interbevgroup.com/.
Open Graph tags complete
Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.
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.interbevgroup.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 https://www.interbevgroup.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 (430 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 21 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
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_FAILED”.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
18 of 21 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
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.
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 413 words of copy
The homepage carries about 413 words of visible text.
2 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Contact”.
1 call to action
The homepage has 1 call to action, for example “Contact”.
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.
2 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 2 hosts 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 interbevgroup.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Hosting
- Akamai Cloud
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 21 issues on interbevgroup.com, including 9 speed issues, 2 SEO issues and 3 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.