Website review, no card needed
malteurop.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 31 October 202635 issues · 77 checks
This review found 35 issues worth fixing on malteurop.com, 7 of them high impact, across 77 checks. The most urgent: page weight: 10.7 MB in 45 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
74CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.6 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 82 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 83 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 83 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 76 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 78 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 85 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 85 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 91 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 91 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 91 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 88 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
Mobile performance score: 57
57/100Your mobile performance score is 57. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
650 ms · 108 KiB6 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (108 KiB).
Render-blocking requests
600 ms14 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 600 ms.
Reduce unused JavaScript
300 ms · 61 KiBAbout 61 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
Improve image delivery
300 ms · 44 KiB2 images could be 44 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
7 long tasks on the main thread
7 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 310 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 82 KiBAbout 82 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.
Minify JavaScript
150 ms · 15 KiB15 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
2 third-party services on the page
2 third-party services load with your homepage (elfsightcdn.com and skynettechnologies.com), adding 72 KiB and 17 ms of main-thread time.
Legacy JavaScript
10 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 10 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
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: 1.8 s
A phone's processor spends 1.8 s on main-thread work while loading, 391 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 2 ms
2 msYour server sent the HTML in 2 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: 6.5 s
6.5 sYour largest element takes 6.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “Malt Lager”.
Real-user CLS: 0.12
0.12For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.12 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Time to Interactive: 6.5 s
6.5 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 6.5 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.184
0.184The layout shifts by 0.184 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.
Speed Index: 4.8 s
4.8 sVisually, the page fills in at 4.8 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Total Blocking Time: 334 ms
334 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 334 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 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) held steady for real visitors
+6%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 82 ms to 88 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-8%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.8 s to 1.6 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
5 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 1.6 s
1.6 sReal visitors wait 1.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 86 ms
86 msReal visitors wait 86 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
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: 733 ms
733 msReal visitors wait 733 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
First Contentful Paint: 1.6 s
1.6 sThe first text or image appears after 1.6 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.
Images and page weight
Page weight: 10.7 MB in 45 requests
10.7 MBYour homepage downloads 10.7 MB in 45 requests on a phone: media 9.6 MB (3), fonts 705 KiB (4) and scripts 188 KiB (16). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
1 image below the first screen load straight away
1 image further down the page (22 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 3.0 g of CO₂ per visit
3.04 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 3.04 g of CO₂e: 365.1 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
2 checks passed
Images use modern formats
Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
7 tap targets too small
7 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
1 text element with low contrast
1 text element doesn'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 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 13 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
44 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 47 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 44 passed and 3 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 (20 characters)
Your title is only 20 characters: “MALTEUROP | Homepage”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
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.malteurop.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.
16 internal links, 10 external
The homepage links to 16 pages on malteurop.com and 10 external pages.
3 checks passed
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “This is where your beer comes from”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.malteurop.com/en.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
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.malteurop.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 (177 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 pages share a title
https://www.malteurop.com/en/sustainability and https://www.malteurop.com/en/accessibility-statement all use the title “MALTEUROP | Sustainability”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
10 pages without a meta description
https://www.malteurop.com/en/our-products, https://www.malteurop.com/en/about-us, https://www.malteurop.com/en/sustainability, https://www.malteurop.com/en/careers, https://www.malteurop.com/en/become-client and https://www.malteurop.com/fr/home and 4 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
2 links to non-canonical URLs
Your homepage links to 2 pages by a URL that isn't their canonical one, for example https://www.malteurop.com/fr/home, whose canonical is https://www.malteurop.com/fr. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.
2 pages without an H1
https://www.malteurop.com/en/privacy-policy and https://www.malteurop.com/en/cookie-policy have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
10 internal pages checked
We fetched 10 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
3 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 10 pages we checked loaded without an error.
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 10 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
4 small tap targets
4 of 11 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
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”.
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: “900+ clients”. 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.
Only about 213 words
The homepage has only about 213 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
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.
2 checks passed
2 calls to action
The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “Learn more” and “Ethic'call”.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Matomo.
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.
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 malteurop.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
- Drupal
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Matomo
- Hosting
- Hexanet
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 35 issues on malteurop.com, including 14 speed issues, 6 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.