Website review, no card needed
kurosbio.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 23 October 202632 issues · 84 checks
This review found 32 issues worth fixing on kurosbio.com, 15 of them high impact, across 84 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
81BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.3 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 91 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 91 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 93 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 91 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 91 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 86 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 90 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 112 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 109 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 114 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 112 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 85 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 91 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
Speed
Improve image delivery
2.4 s · 459 KiB1 image could be 459 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.4 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
2.8 s6 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 2.8 s.
Mobile performance score: 59
59/100Your mobile performance score is 59 (desktop: 74). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Legacy JavaScript
600 ms · 36 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 36 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 600 ms faster on a phone.
5 third-party services on the page
5 third-party services load with your homepage (Google CDN, Civic and b-cdn.net and others), adding 4.4 MB and 133 ms of main-thread time.
b-cdn.net adds 11 ms
11 msb-cdn.net costs a phone 11 ms of main-thread work and 3.9 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.
Document request latency
262 KiBThe HTML itself could arrive sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.
Reduce unused JavaScript
150 ms · 57 KiBAbout 57 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.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 56 KiBAbout 56 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.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
150 ms · 13 KiB2 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (13 KiB).
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
1 long task on the main thread
1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 66 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.
Forced reflow
Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.5 s
A phone's processor spends 0.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 153 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 402 ms
402 msYour server sent the HTML in 402 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Largest Contentful Paint: 14.8 s
14.8 sYour largest element takes 14.8 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the element shown below.
First Contentful Paint: 5.7 s
5.7 sThe first text or image appears after 5.7 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Time to Interactive: 14.9 s
14.9 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 14.9 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 6.7 s
6.7 sVisually, the page fills in at 6.7 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Largest content (LCP) got 101% slower for real visitors
+101%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.2 s to 2.3 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
14 images without width and height
14 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-3%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 91 ms to 91 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: 1.2 s
1.2 sReal visitors wait 1.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 84 ms
84 msReal visitors wait 84 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: 1.1 s
1.1 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.1 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 557 ms
557 msReal visitors wait 557 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.001
0.001The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.001, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 16 ms
16 msScripts block the page for only 16 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
Page weight: 4.8 MB in 49 requests
4.8 MBYour homepage downloads 4.8 MB in 49 requests on a phone: media 2.1 MB (1), images 1.8 MB (27) and HTML 394 KiB (1). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
15 images in older formats
15 images (1.1 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.
3 images below the first screen load straight away
3 images further down the page (376 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
2 images far larger than shown
2 KiB2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example Kuros-world-map_website-feb-19-1024x654.png at 1,024 px wide, shown at 340 px. Resized copies would save about 2 KiB.
About 1.4 g of CO₂ per visit
1.36 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.36 g of CO₂e: 162.6 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
Invalid ARIA attributes
2 elements use ARIA attributes their role does not allow, which confuses screen readers.
Certain ARIA roles must contain particular children (2 elements)
Certain ARIA roles must contain particular children: 2 elements on the page fail this check, rated critical by axe-core.
ARIA attributes must conform to valid values (2 elements)
ARIA attributes must conform to valid values: 2 elements on the page fail this check, rated critical by axe-core.
10 text elements with low contrast
10 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
ARIA input fields must have an accessible name (2 elements)
ARIA input fields must have an accessible name: 2 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
Positive tabindex
2 elements have a tabindex above 0, which scrambles the keyboard order.
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes (1 element)
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (13 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 13 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Elements marked as presentational should be consistently ignored (2 elements)
Elements marked as presentational should be consistently ignored: 2 elements on the page fail this check, rated minor by axe-core.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h5 and h2 → h5), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 26 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 59 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 49 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
5 links crawlers can't follow
5 links have no real href, so search engines can't follow them.
65 internal links, 5 external
The homepage links to 65 pages on kurosbio.com and 5 external pages.
8 checks passed
Meta description: 136 characters
Your meta description is 136 characters: “Kuros Biosciences pioneer biologic bone graft technologies, combining innovation with strong clinical evidence, to adva…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Grow bone with MagnetOsTM”.
Title: 54 characters
Your title is a healthy 54 characters: “Kuros Biosciences – Grow Bone with MagnetOs Bone Graft”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://kurosbio.com/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: BreadcrumbList, ImageObject, Organization, WebPage and WebSite.
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://kurosbio.com/sitemap_index.xml.
AI search readiness
No llms.txt
There is no https://kurosbio.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.
3 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.
Organization data: 4 of 6 facts
Your Organization JSON-LD gives name, url, logo and sameAs (social profiles); description and contact details would complete it.
Text is in the HTML
Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (1,117 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 24 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
3 JavaScript errors while loading
3 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “The Content Security Policy directive 'upgrade-insecure-requests' is ignored when delivered in a report-only policy.”.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
11 of 13 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.
Thin social proof
Social proof on the homepage: 7 testimonial or review blocks. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.
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 1,156 words of copy
The homepage carries about 1,156 words of visible text.
1 checks passed
4 calls to action
The homepage has 4 calls to action, for example “Request Global Research Summary”, “Contact” and “Get in touch”.
Privacy and tracking
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.
7 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 7 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 kurosbio.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
- WordPress
- Framework
- jQuery
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 32 issues on kurosbio.com, including 13 speed issues, 1 SEO issue 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.