Website review, no card needed

mankindag.com logo

mankindag.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 1 November 202638 issues · 82 checks

This review found 38 issues worth fixing on mankindag.com, 14 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.

  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
6.4 s5.1 sMay 9Oct 246.2 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20265.7 s
May 16, 20265.7 s
May 23, 20265.5 s
May 30, 20265.4 s
Jun 6, 20265.5 s
Jun 13, 20265.5 s
Jun 20, 20265.6 s
Jun 27, 20265.6 s
Jul 4, 20265.5 s
Jul 11, 20265.4 s
Jul 18, 20265.3 s
Jul 25, 20265.3 s
Aug 1, 20265.3 s
Aug 8, 20265.3 s
Aug 15, 20265.3 s
Aug 22, 20265.3 s
Aug 29, 20265.4 s
Sep 5, 20265.3 s
Sep 12, 20265.4 s
Sep 19, 20265.6 s
Sep 26, 20265.7 s
Oct 3, 20266.0 s
Oct 10, 20266.2 s
Oct 17, 20266.2 s
Oct 24, 20266.2 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
108 ms92 msMay 9Oct 2494 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 2026105 ms
May 16, 2026105 ms
May 23, 2026102 ms
May 30, 2026103 ms
Jun 6, 2026104 ms
Jun 13, 2026104 ms
Jun 20, 2026106 ms
Jun 27, 2026106 ms
Jul 4, 2026105 ms
Jul 11, 2026104 ms
Jul 18, 2026103 ms
Jul 25, 2026102 ms
Aug 1, 2026102 ms
Aug 8, 2026103 ms
Aug 15, 2026101 ms
Aug 22, 2026101 ms
Aug 29, 202698 ms
Sep 5, 202698 ms
Sep 12, 2026100 ms
Sep 19, 2026101 ms
Sep 26, 2026103 ms
Oct 3, 202699 ms
Oct 10, 202697 ms
Oct 17, 202696 ms
Oct 24, 202694 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

Full-page screenshot of mankindag.com (phone) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. mankindag.com at 0.8 s0.8 s
  2. mankindag.com at 1.6 s1.6 s
  3. mankindag.com at 2.5 s2.5 s
  4. mankindag.com at 3.3 s3.3 s
  5. mankindag.com at 4.1 s4.1 s
  6. mankindag.com at 4.9 s4.9 s
  7. mankindag.com at 5.8 s5.8 s
  8. mankindag.com at 6.6 s6.6 s

Speed

9 to fix53
  • Render-blocking requests

    1.6 s

    9 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.6 s.

  • Mobile performance score: 53

    53/100

    Your mobile performance score is 53. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • 8 third-party services on the page

    8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, infisecure.com and Cloudflare CDN and others), adding 893 KiB and 537 ms of main-thread time.

  • Document request latency

    550 ms · 68 KiB

    The HTML itself could arrive about 550 ms sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.

  • Reduce initial server response time

    560 ms

    Reduce initial server response time. Google estimates savings of 560 ms on a phone.

  • Google Tag Manager adds 377 ms

    377 ms

    Google Tag Manager costs a phone 377 ms of main-thread work and 661 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.

  • Font display

    400 ms

    Web fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 400 ms).

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    372 KiB

    About 372 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page.

  • Server response: 660 ms

    660 ms

    Your server takes 660 ms to send the HTML. Google recommends under 600 ms; everything else waits for it.

  • 6 long tasks on the main thread

    6 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 145 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    15 KiB

    2 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (15 KiB).

  • 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 JavaScript

    4 KiB

    4 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

  • Minify CSS

    2 KiB

    2 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.

1 checks passed
  • Main-thread work: 1.3 s

    A phone's processor spends 1.3 s on main-thread work while loading, 540 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

Core Web Vitals

10 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.

  • Real-user LCP: 7.1 s

    7.1 s

    Real visitors wait 7.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user FCP: 6.6 s

    6.6 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 6.6 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 3.8 s

    3.8 s

    Real visitors wait 3.8 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Speed Index: 10.1 s

    10.1 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 10.1 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.446

    0.446

    The layout shifts by 0.446 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.

  • Time to Interactive: 10.2 s

    10.2 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 10.2 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • First Contentful Paint: 3.5 s

    3.5 s

    The first text or image appears after 3.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.12

    0.12

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.12 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 3.5 s

    3.5 s

    Your largest element takes 3.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Mankind Agritech Limited headquartered in New Delhi is an I…”. Most of its time is element render delay (5.1 s).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    +9%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 5.7 s to 6.2 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

3 checks passed
  • Real-user INP: 120 ms

    120 ms

    Real visitors wait 120 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Tap response (INP) got 10% faster for real visitors

    -10%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 105 ms to 94 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Total Blocking Time: 168 ms

    168 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 168 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

Images and page weight

100
  • About 0.4 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.41 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.41 g of CO₂e: 49.7 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: 1.5 MB in 90 requests

    1.5 MB

    Your homepage downloads 1.5 MB in 90 requests on a phone: scripts 946 KiB (32), images 213 KiB (30) and fonts 108 KiB (5). 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

9 to fixGoogle 8375
  • Images must have alternative text (1 element)

    Images must have alternative text: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated critical by axe-core.

  • <html> element must have a lang attribute (1 element)

    <html> element must have a lang attribute: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.

  • Unlabelled dropdowns

    1 dropdown has no label.

  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (8 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 8 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • No main landmark

    The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.

  • Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)

    Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.

  • 58 text elements with low contrast

    58 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.

  • 25 tap targets too small

    25 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.

  • 1 form field without a label

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

  • Headings skip levels

    Headings skip levels (h1 → h4, h2 → h4 and h3 → h5), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.

  • Elements with role="none" or role="presentation" have conflicts

    Elements with role="none" or role="presentation" have conflicts (2 elements).

1 checks passed
  • 15 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 21 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 15 passed and 6 failed. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

4 to fixGoogle 8585
  • Meta description is long (183 characters)

    Your meta description is 183 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.

  • No XML sitemap

    No XML sitemap at https://mankindag.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • No robots.txt

    There is no robots.txt at mankindag.com/robots.txt, the first file search crawlers ask for.

  • 5 links with vague text

    5 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.

  • 65 internal links, 31 external

    The homepage links to 65 pages on mankindag.com and 31 external pages.

5 checks passed
  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Crop Protection & Agriculture”.

  • Title: 56 characters

    Your title is a healthy 56 characters: “Agriculture Chemical Company in India | Mankind Agritech”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://mankindag.com/.

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: BreadcrumbList, Organization, WebPage and WebSite.

  • Open Graph tags complete

    Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.

AI search readiness

100
  • No llms.txt

    There is no https://mankindag.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

    There is no robots.txt, so nothing stops the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity from reading the site and cite it in answers.

  • Organization data: 5 of 6 facts

    Your Organization JSON-LD gives name, url, logo, sameAs (social profiles) and contact details; description would complete it.

Other pages

3 to fix83
  • 15 pages share a title

    https://mankindag.com/about-us, https://mankindag.com/policies-and-disclosures, https://mankindag.com/products, https://mankindag.com/product/herbicide, https://mankindag.com/product/insecticide and https://mankindag.com/product/fungicide and 9 others all use the title “Validation request”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

  • 15 pages without a meta description

    https://mankindag.com/about-us, https://mankindag.com/policies-and-disclosures, https://mankindag.com/products, https://mankindag.com/product/herbicide, https://mankindag.com/product/insecticide and https://mankindag.com/product/fungicide and 9 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • 15 pages without an H1

    https://mankindag.com/about-us, https://mankindag.com/policies-and-disclosures, https://mankindag.com/products, https://mankindag.com/product/herbicide, https://mankindag.com/product/insecticide and https://mankindag.com/product/fungicide and 9 others have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.

  • 15 pages with very little text

    https://mankindag.com/about-us, https://mankindag.com/policies-and-disclosures, https://mankindag.com/products, https://mankindag.com/product/herbicide, https://mankindag.com/product/insecticide and https://mankindag.com/product/fungicide and 9 others have under 150 words in the HTML. Thin pages rarely rank; if the text loads with JavaScript, crawlers that don't run it see even less.

  • 15 internal pages checked

    We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 25 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

4 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.

  • 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

Google 96100
2 checks passed
  • No console errors

    No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

3 to fix64
  • 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.

  • No social proof

    No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust you.

  • Only about 83 words

    The homepage has only about 83 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.

  • 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.

4 checks passed
  • 2 calls to action

    The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “Contact Us”.

  • 3 short forms

    3 short forms (2 fields at most) are right on the homepage.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics.

  • Direct contact links

    Visitors can reach you directly: 2 phone links and 1 email link.

Privacy and tracking

  • 2 cookies set on arrival

    2

    Opening the homepage sets 2 cookies (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.

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 mankindag.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
Azure

Company

Employees
380
Headquarters
New Delhi

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

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 38 issues on mankindag.com, including 19 speed issues, 4 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