Website review, no card needed
loreal.co.in website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 22 October 202636 issues · 82 checks
This review found 36 issues worth fixing on loreal.co.in, 17 of them high impact, across 82 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
70CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.5 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 179 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 178 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 180 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 182 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 187 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 187 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 189 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 185 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 183 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 183 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 184 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 181 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 183 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 181 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 179 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
Render-blocking requests
3.4 s5 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 3.4 s.
Reduce unused JavaScript
1.5 s · 430 KiBAbout 430 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.5 s faster on a phone.
Google Tag Manager adds 1.2 s
1.2 sGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 1.2 s of main-thread work and 501 KiB of downloads while your page loads. That alone is enough to make taps feel slow. Loading it after the page is usable, or only on the pages that need it, takes that off the critical path.
Mobile performance score: 32
32/100Your mobile performance score is 32 (desktop: 77). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
2 third-party services on the page
2 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager and Optanon), adding 714 KiB and 1.4 s of main-thread time.
Reduce unused CSS
450 ms · 67 KiBAbout 67 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
11 long tasks on the main thread
11 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 418 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
300 ms · 68 KiB5 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (68 KiB).
Main-thread work: 3.5 s
A phone's processor spends 3.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 2.1 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
Legacy JavaScript
23 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 23 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
Phones get a much slower page than desktops
Desktop scores 77 but mobile only 32. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.
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: 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.
Largest Contentful Paint: 9.7 s
9.7 sYour largest element takes 9.7 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “L'Oréal SA uses cookies on its website, including cookies f…”. Most of its time is element render delay (6.5 s).
Speed Index: 10.9 s
10.9 sVisually, the page fills in at 10.9 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Total Blocking Time: 1.5 s
1.5 sScripts block taps and scrolling for 1.5 s in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Time to Interactive: 10.6 s
10.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 10.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 3.8 s
3.8 sThe first text or image appears after 3.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user LCP: 2.7 s
2.7 sReal visitors wait 2.7 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 1.9 s
1.9 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.9 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 1.6 s
1.6 sReal visitors wait 1.6 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
+1%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 179 ms to 179 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) got 10% slower for real visitors
+10%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.3 s to 2.5 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
3 checks passed
Real-user INP: 169 ms
169 msReal visitors wait 169 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.01
0.01For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.01 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.012
0.012The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.012, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
About 0.4 g of CO₂ per visit
0.38 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.38 g of CO₂e: 45.3 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: 1.3 MB in 31 requests
1.3 MBYour homepage downloads 1.3 MB in 31 requests on a phone: scripts 891 KiB (12), fonts 259 KiB (5) and images 81 KiB (4). 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
Invalid ARIA attributes
1 element use ARIA attributes their role does not allow, which confuses screen readers.
ARIA attributes must conform to valid values (1 element)
ARIA attributes must conform to valid values: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated critical by axe-core.
5 text elements with low contrast
5 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
2 tap targets too small
2 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.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (9 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 9 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination (1 element)
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (1 element).
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 65 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
52 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: 52 passed and 7 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No H1 headline
There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.
Title is short (22 characters)
Your title is only 22 characters: “L'Oréal Groupe | India”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
Structured data has 1 problem
Structured data found (BreadcrumbList, Organization and WebSite) but with 1 problem, for example “WebSite: missing name”.
No XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at https://www.loreal.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.
210 internal links, 12 external
The homepage links to 210 pages on loreal.co.in and 12 external pages.
4 checks passed
Meta description: 160 characters
Your meta description is 160 characters: “Formed in 1994, L’Oréal Groupe India is a transformative beauty leader, providing consumers with sophisticated, safe, h…”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.loreal.com/en/india/.
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.
AI search readiness
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.loreal.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 description; sameAs (social profiles) and contact details would complete it.
Text is in the HTML
Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (1,174 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
11 pages without an H1
https://www.loreal.com/en, https://www.loreal.com/en/egypt, https://www.loreal.com/en/israel, https://www.loreal.com/en/middle-east, https://www.loreal.com/en/morocco and https://www.loreal.com/en/south-africa and 5 others have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
6 pages slow to respond
https://www.loreal.com/en/mediaroom, https://www.loreal.com/en/egypt, https://www.loreal.com/en/israel, https://www.loreal.com/en/middle-east, https://www.loreal.com/en/morocco and https://www.loreal.com/en/south-africa took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 168 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.
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.
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
6 small tap targets
6 of 28 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 “Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'register')”.
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.
Thin social proof
Social proof on the homepage: 2 testimonial or review blocks. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.
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 839 words of copy
The homepage carries about 839 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
2 calls to action
The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “Join the Refill Movement”.
1 short form
A short form (0 fields at most) is right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Privacy and tracking
1 tracker load before any consent
1Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (OneTrust) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
9 cookies set on arrival
9Opening the homepage sets 9 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
3 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 3 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: OneTrust
A consent management tool (OneTrust) loads with the page.
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 loreal.co.in, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Analytics
- Google Tag Manager
Company
- Founded
- 1991
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 36 issues on loreal.co.in, including 18 speed issues, 5 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.