Website review, no card needed
maxservice.cl website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 23 October 202649 issues · 87 checks
This review found 49 issues worth fixing on maxservice.cl, 19 of them high impact, across 87 checks. The most urgent: document request latency. 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
62DClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 3.5 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 3.6 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 3.8 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 4.1 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 4.1 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 4.2 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 290 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 283 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 276 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 273 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 255 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 232 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 221 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 219 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 221 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 226 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 235 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 230 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 233 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 228 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 220 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 219 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 218 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 231 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 250 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 268 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 275 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 270 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 264 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 239 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 236 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
0.7 s
1.3 s
2.0 s
2.7 s
3.3 s
4.0 s
4.7 s
5.3 s
Speed
Document request latency
2.4 sThe HTML itself could arrive about 2.4 s sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.
Reduce initial server response time
2.3 sReduce initial server response time. Google estimates savings of 2.3 s on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 46
46/100Your mobile performance score is 46 (desktop: 52). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Server response: 2.4 s
2.4 sYour server takes 2.4 s to send the HTML. Google recommends under 600 ms; everything else waits for it.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (vtexassets.com, Google Tag Manager and Facebook and others), adding 2.8 MB and 1.3 s of main-thread time.
Reduce unused JavaScript
450 ms · 659 KiBAbout 659 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
vtexassets.com adds 692 ms
692 msvtexassets.com costs a phone 692 ms of main-thread work and 1.5 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.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
300 ms · 427 KiB45 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (427 KiB).
Improve image delivery
300 ms · 138 KiB6 images could be 138 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.
Reduce unused CSS
300 ms · 74 KiBAbout 74 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
Google Tag Manager adds 317 ms
317 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 317 ms of main-thread work and 526 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.
Render-blocking requests
300 ms1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 300 ms.
Main-thread work: 3.0 s
A phone's processor spends 3.0 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.8 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
Legacy JavaScript
150 ms · 47 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 47 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
10 long tasks on the main thread
10 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 130 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Minify JavaScript
26 KiB26 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
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.
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.
Real-user CLS: 0.28
0.28For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.28 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 3.5 s
3.5 sReal visitors see the first content after 3.5 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Time to Interactive: 21.4 s
21.4 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 21.4 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 8.4 s
8.4 sYour largest element takes 8.4 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
First Contentful Paint: 4.5 s
4.5 sThe first text or image appears after 4.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Speed Index: 8.4 s
8.4 sVisually, the page fills in at 8.4 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Real-user LCP: 3.6 s
3.6 sReal visitors wait 3.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 429 ms
429 msReal visitors wait 429 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user TTFB: 1.2 s
1.2 sReal visitors wait 1.2 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
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.
Total Blocking Time: 240 ms
240 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 240 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
15 images without width and height
15 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Largest content (LCP) got 16% slower for real visitors
+16%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 3.6 s to 4.2 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
1 checks passed
Tap response (INP) got 17% faster for real visitors
-17%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 290 ms to 236 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 3.1 MB in 181 requests
3.1 MBYour homepage downloads 3.1 MB in 181 requests on a phone: scripts 2.0 MB (64), images 457 KiB (45) and HTML 332 KiB (4). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
6 images below the first screen load straight away
6 images further down the page (265 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
2 images in older formats
2 images (77 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.
About 0.9 g of CO₂ per visit
0.88 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.88 g of CO₂e: 105.5 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
41 text elements with low contrast
41 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
27 tap targets too small
27 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
ARIA commands must have an accessible name (3 elements)
ARIA commands must have an accessible name: 3 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
Hidden but focusable
3 elements hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (2 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 2 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.
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.
15 links without text
15 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (6 elements).
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 99 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
40 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 48 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 40 passed and 8 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
Structured data has 1 problem
Structured data found (ItemList and WebSite) but with 1 problem, for example “WebSite: missing name”.
No social preview image
No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
113 internal links, 1 external
The homepage links to 113 pages on maxservice.cl and 1 external page.
6 checks passed
Meta description: 144 characters
Your meta description is 144 characters: “En Max Service encuentra zapatos de seguridad, cascos, guantes e implementos de protección personal EPP, al mejor preci…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Max Service, Calzado de seguridad, Ropa Industrial y Protecciones”.
Title: 49 characters
Your title is a healthy 49 characters: “Max Service - Innovación, Seguridad y Experiencia”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.maxservice.cl/.
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://www.maxservice.cl/sitemap.xml.
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 /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 (554 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
1 page without a title
/calzado-de-seguridad/botas-de-seguridad has no <title>, so Google invents the link text in results.
3 pages share a title
/, /institucional/sucursales and /institucional/preguntas-frecuentes all use the title “Max Service - Innovación, Seguridad y Experiencia”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
1 page without a meta description
/calzado-de-seguridad/botas-de-seguridad has no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
2 pages share a meta description
/institucional/sucursales and /institucional/preguntas-frecuentes use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
1 page without an H1
/calzado-de-seguridad/botas-de-seguridad has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
4 pages slow to respond
/institucional/preguntas-frecuentes, /calzado-de-seguridad/botas-de-seguridad, /calzado-de-seguridad/botines-de-seguridad and /calzado-de-seguridad/zapatos-de-seguridad took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 95 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
3 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.
Best practices
17 small tap targets
17 of 42 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
6 JavaScript errors while loading
6 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.
No calls to action
We found no call-to-action buttons or links (such as “Book a demo” or “Get a quote”) anywhere on the homepage.
No social proof
No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust 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 257 words of copy
The homepage carries about 257 words of visible text.
2 checks passed
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager and Meta Pixel.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 1 phone link and 0 email links.
Privacy and tracking
5 trackers load before any consent
5Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Meta Pixel and Microsoft Clarity (measured from a US location before any click). No consent tool was detected. Visitors from the EU, UK and several US states must be asked first.
18 cookies set on arrival
18Opening the homepage sets 18 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.
36 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 36 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
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 maxservice.cl, 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
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 49 issues on maxservice.cl, including 26 speed issues, 2 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.