Website review, no card needed

intercel.eu logo

intercel.eu website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 25 October 202647 issues · 101 checks

This review found 47 issues worth fixing on intercel.eu, 16 of them high impact, across 101 checks. The most urgent: improve image delivery. 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 s2.5 sMay 2Oct 172.7 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 2, 20262.8 s
May 9, 20262.6 s
May 16, 20262.6 s
May 23, 20262.7 s
May 30, 20262.7 s
Jun 6, 20262.9 s
Jun 13, 20262.9 s
Jun 20, 20262.9 s
Jun 27, 20262.8 s
Jul 4, 20262.8 s
Jul 11, 20262.8 s
Jul 18, 20262.9 s
Jul 25, 20263.0 s
Aug 1, 20263.1 s
Aug 8, 20263.0 s
Aug 15, 20263.1 s
Aug 22, 20263.3 s
Aug 29, 20263.3 s
Sep 5, 20263.3 s
Sep 12, 20263.2 s
Sep 19, 20263.1 s
Sep 26, 20262.9 s
Oct 3, 20262.9 s
Oct 10, 20262.9 s
Oct 17, 20262.7 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
371 ms129 msMay 2Oct 17218 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 2, 2026197 ms
May 9, 2026197 ms
May 16, 2026193 ms
May 23, 2026189 ms
May 30, 2026180 ms
Jun 6, 2026187 ms
Jun 13, 2026189 ms
Jun 20, 2026197 ms
Jun 27, 2026189 ms
Jul 4, 2026183 ms
Jul 11, 2026157 ms
Jul 18, 2026179 ms
Jul 25, 2026195 ms
Aug 1, 2026192 ms
Aug 8, 2026212 ms
Aug 15, 2026224 ms
Aug 22, 2026222 ms
Aug 29, 2026266 ms
Sep 5, 2026270 ms
Sep 12, 2026338 ms
Sep 19, 2026343 ms
Sep 26, 2026330 ms
Oct 3, 2026299 ms
Oct 10, 2026227 ms
Oct 17, 2026218 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

12 to fix28
  • Improve image delivery

    4.1 s · 1.3 MB

    10 images could be 1.3 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 4.1 s faster on a phone.

  • Render-blocking requests

    4.3 s

    63 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 4.3 s.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    1.4 s · 297 KiB

    About 297 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.4 s faster on a phone.

  • Mobile performance score: 28

    28/100

    Your mobile performance score is 28 (desktop: 49). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.

  • Main-thread work: 5.4 s

    A phone's processor spends 5.4 s on main-thread work while loading, 2.9 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    150 ms · 1.6 MB

    About 1.6 MB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.

  • 8 third-party services on the page

    8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Google CDN and Cookiebot and others), adding 1.7 MB and 1.1 s of main-thread time.

  • Google Tag Manager adds 559 ms

    559 ms

    Google Tag Manager costs a phone 559 ms of main-thread work and 678 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 411 ms

    411 ms

    Google CDN costs a phone 411 ms of main-thread work and 734 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.

  • 20 long tasks on the main thread

    20 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 394 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    300 ms · 21 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 21 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.

  • 1,860 HTML elements

    The page has 1,860 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

  • Minify JavaScript

    109 KiB

    109 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    58 KiB

    4 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (58 KiB).

  • Minify CSS

    14 KiB

    14 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.

  • 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: 101 ms

    101 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 101 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

11 to fix33
  • 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: 12.2 s

    12.2 s

    Your largest element takes 12.2 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.

  • Time to Interactive: 30.0 s

    30.0 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 30.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • First Contentful Paint: 6.2 s

    6.2 s

    The first text or image appears after 6.2 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Speed Index: 11.1 s

    11.1 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 11.1 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Total Blocking Time: 1.6 s

    1.6 s

    Scripts block taps and scrolling for 1.6 s in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user LCP: 2.9 s

    2.9 s

    Real visitors wait 2.9 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 229 ms

    229 ms

    Real visitors wait 229 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user FCP: 2.0 s

    2.0 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 2.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.5 s

    1.5 s

    Real visitors wait 1.5 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • 1 image without width and height

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

  • Tap response (INP) got 13% slower for real visitors

    +13%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 197 ms to 218 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 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.8 s to 2.7 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

2 checks passed
  • Real-user CLS: 0.05

    0.05

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.05 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.076

    0.076

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.076, good is under 0.1).

Images and page weight

6 to fix29
  • Page weight: 6.8 MB in 206 requests

    6.8 MB

    Your homepage downloads 6.8 MB in 206 requests on a phone: scripts 3.3 MB (110), images 2.1 MB (16) and fonts 522 KiB (5). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • 1 image over 500 KB

    Praatplaat-2700x1800-geen-afloop-scaled.png weighs 719 KiB. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.

  • An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded

    IMG_8914-500x333.jpg is on the first screen but marked loading="lazy", so the browser waits before fetching it and the page looks finished later. Load it eagerly (and give it fetchpriority="high" if it is the main image).

  • 2 images in older formats

    2 images (784 KiB) 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

    441 KiB

    1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example Praatplaat-2700x1800-geen-afloop-scaled.png at 1,600 px wide, shown at 332 px. Resized copies would save about 441 KiB.

  • 1 image below the first screen load straight away

    1 image further down the page (719 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.

  • About 1.9 g of CO₂ per visit

    1.93 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.93 g of CO₂e: 231.7 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

Accessibility

5 to fixGoogle 8994
  • Invalid ARIA attributes

    1 element use ARIA attributes their role does not allow, which confuses screen readers.

  • 2 text elements with low contrast

    2 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 (1 element)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • 2 links without text

    2 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.

  • 1 form field without a label

    1 form field has no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.

2 checks passed
  • Every image has alt text

    All 27 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 49 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 53 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 49 passed and 4 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

3 to fixGoogle 9288
  • Title is short (25 characters)

    Your title is only 25 characters: “Intercel | Endless Energy”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • 1 link crawlers can't follow

    1 link has no real href, so search engines can't follow it.

  • 92 internal links, 10 external

    The homepage links to 92 pages on intercel.eu and 10 external pages.

6 checks passed
  • Meta description: 128 characters

    Your meta description is 128 characters: “Certified, European battery supplier. From motive and standby power, to energy storage and custom batteries for electri…”.

  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Battery solutions you can trust”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://intercel.eu/.

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: Article, ImageObject, Organization, Person and WebPage.

  • 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://intercel.eu/sitemap_index.xml.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88
  • Organization data is thin (2 of 6 facts)

    Your Organization JSON-LD is missing url, 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 /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 (1,027 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

1 to fix95
  • 1 page without a meta description

    /motive/license-plate-finder has 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 35 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

6 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.

  • 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 to fixGoogle 9687
  • 5 small tap targets

    5 of 15 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: the server responded with a status of 401 ()”.

  • Missing source maps

    Large scripts ship without source maps.

1 checks passed
  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Security and trust

2 to fix86
  • 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 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 (intercel.eu).

  • Valid certificate (75 days left)

    The certificate from Let's Encrypt · YE1 verifies for intercel.eu and is valid for another 75 days.

  • http:// redirects to https

    http://intercel.eu 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.

  • All 47 links work

    All 47 links checked from your homepage (40 internal, 7 external) answered without errors.

Domain and trust

  • No CAA record

    intercel.eu 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.

Content and conversion

3 to fix67
  • 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.

  • Thin social proof

    Social proof on the homepage: 1 trust badge. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.

  • A 10-field form

    Your longest form asks for 10 fields (2 required). Every extra field lowers completion.

  • 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 892 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 892 words of visible text.

3 checks passed
  • 5 calls to action

    The homepage has 5 calls to action, for example “Contact”, “Learn more about Intercel” and “Subscribe”.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.

  • Direct contact links

    Visitors can reach you directly: 5 phone links and 4 email links.

Email authentication

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

    DMARC is set to p=none, so mail pretending to be intercel.eu 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:_spf.exonet.nl include:spf.mandrillapp.com a:dispatch-eu.ppe-hosted.c…”.

  • DKIM signing found

    A DKIM key is published (selector “selector1”, “selector2” and “k2”), so receivers can verify mail really came from you.

Privacy and tracking

  • 4 trackers load before any consent

    4

    Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager and Reddit Pixel (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (Cookiebot) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.

  • 13 cookies set on arrival

    13

    Opening the homepage sets 13 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).

  • 12 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 12 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

1 checks passed
  • Consent tool: Cookiebot

    A consent management tool (Cookiebot) loads with the page.

Upkeep, stack and company

  • It runs WordPress 7.1; the current release is 7.1.3.

Stack

CMS
WordPress 7.1
Framework
React
E-commerce
WooCommerce
Analytics
Google Tag Manager

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

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 47 issues on intercel.eu, including 23 speed issues, 3 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

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