Website review, no card needed
medincus.pl website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 19 October 202650 issues · 112 checks
This review found 50 issues worth fixing on medincus.pl, 20 of them high impact, across 112 checks. The most urgent: reduce unused JavaScript. 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
76CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| May 2, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.4 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2026 | 126 ms |
| May 2, 2026 | 125 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 125 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 126 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 127 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 127 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 128 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 129 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 128 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 128 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 128 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 127 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 126 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 125 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 127 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 125 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 126 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 126 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 123 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 125 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 124 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 125 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 124 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 123 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 123 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
Reduce unused JavaScript
2.4 s · 615 KiBAbout 615 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.4 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
2.4 s28 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 2.4 s.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1.3 s · 389 KiB99 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (389 KiB).
Mobile performance score: 37
37/100Your mobile performance score is 37 (desktop: 51). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Main-thread work: 5.6 s
A phone's processor spends 5.6 s on main-thread work while loading, 2.9 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
3,730 HTML elements
The page has 3,730 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google CDN, Google Tag Manager and Facebook and others), adding 1.5 MB and 1.7 s of main-thread time.
Google CDN adds 670 ms
670 msGoogle CDN costs a phone 670 ms of main-thread work and 733 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.
Google Tag Manager adds 658 ms
658 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 658 ms of main-thread work and 521 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.
Reduce initial server response time
560 msReduce initial server response time. Google estimates savings of 560 ms on a phone.
Document request latency
550 msThe HTML itself could arrive about 550 ms sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.
Font display
450 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 450 ms).
Reduce unused CSS
300 ms · 107 KiBAbout 107 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.
18 long tasks on the main thread
18 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 381 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Server response: 660 ms
660 msYour server takes 660 ms to send the HTML. Google recommends under 600 ms; everything else waits for it.
Improve image delivery
99 KiB2 images could be 99 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
Legacy JavaScript
12 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 12 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.
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: 12.2 s
12.2 sYour largest element takes 12.2 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
Time to Interactive: 16.3 s
16.3 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 16.3 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 10.8 s
10.8 sVisually, the page fills in at 10.8 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Total Blocking Time: 1.3 s
1.3 sScripts block taps and scrolling for 1.3 s in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user TTFB: 1.3 s
1.3 sReal visitors wait 1.3 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
First Contentful Paint: 2.6 s
2.6 sThe first text or image appears after 2.6 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
10 images without width and height
10 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-2%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-10, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 126 ms to 123 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+1%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-10, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.4 s to 2.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
5 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 2.1 s
2.1 sReal visitors wait 2.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 143 ms
143 msReal visitors wait 143 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: 1.5 s
1.5 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.5 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.001
0.001The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.001, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 3.2 MB in 123 requests
3.2 MBYour homepage downloads 3.2 MB in 123 requests on a phone: scripts 1.5 MB (44), images 673 KiB (28) and other files 357 KiB (9). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
1 image far larger than shown
26 KiB1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example Popup5_ok-2.jpg.webp at 1,269 px wide, shown at 287 px. Resized copies would save about 26 KiB.
About 0.9 g of CO₂ per visit
0.90 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.90 g of CO₂e: 107.5 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 load when needed
Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.
Accessibility
Unlabelled dropdowns
5 dropdowns have no label.
1 button without a name
1 button has no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.
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.
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.
Interactive controls must not be nested (1 element)
Interactive controls must not be nested: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
2 images without alt text
2 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
<input type="image"> elements do not have [alt] text
<input type="image"> elements do not have [alt] text (1 element).
All page content should be contained by landmarks (4 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 4 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.
Zoom is disabled
The viewport tag blocks pinch-zoom, which low-vision visitors rely on.
21 form fields without a label
21 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
4 links without text
4 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Headings should not be empty (1 element)
Headings should not be empty: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h1 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
51 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 64 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 51 passed and 13 failed. 4 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
5 H1 headlines
There are 5 <h1> headlines (“Zabiegi migdałków u dzieci i dorosłych”, “Zmagasz się z zatkanym nosem?” and “Powrót do świata dźwięków”). One clear main headline is easier for people and search engines.
Meta description is long (175 characters)
Your meta description is 175 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
375 internal links, 22 external
The homepage links to 375 pages on medincus.pl and 22 external pages.
6 checks passed
Title: 30 characters
Your title is a healthy 30 characters: “Centrum Słuchu i Mowy MEDINCUS”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://medincus.pl/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: BreadcrumbList, 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.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://medincus.pl/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 (3,924 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
3 pages share a meta description
/artykuly/zapytaj-o-wolny-termin, /o-nas/projekty-dofinansowane and /oferta use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
5 pages slow to respond
/oferta/choroby/ospecjalistyczne-inhalacje-gornych-drog-oddechowych, /oferta/choroby/zapalenie-i-bol-ucha, /oferta/choroby/mikrochirurgia-krtani, /oferta/choroby/program-profilaktyki-sluchu and /oferta/choroby/choroby-zatok-i-nosa took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 122 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
7 checks passed
Linked pages load
12 pages of 15 loaded without an error (the rest turned automated requests away).
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
Every page has a meta description
All 12 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 12 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
12 small tap targets
12 of 58 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
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.
Security and trust
No HSTS header
No Strict-Transport-Security header, so browsers may still try plain http first on a return visit.
No Content-Security-Policy
No Content-Security-Policy header, the main browser-side defence against injected scripts.
No clickjacking protection
Neither X-Frame-Options nor a CSP frame-ancestors policy is set, so any site can embed yours in a frame.
No X-Content-Type-Options
X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff is missing, so browsers may guess file types.
No Referrer-Policy
No Referrer-Policy header, so full URLs can leak to the sites you link to.
No Permissions-Policy
No Permissions-Policy header to switch off camera, microphone and location for embedded content.
No security.txt
There is no /.well-known/security.txt telling researchers how to report a security problem to you.
5 checks passed
Served over HTTPS
The homepage is served over HTTPS (medincus.pl).
Valid certificate (62 days left)
The certificate from Let's Encrypt · YR1 verifies for medincus.pl and is valid for another 62 days.
http:// redirects to https
http://medincus.pl redirects to the secure version.
HTTP/2 and HTTP/3
The server speaks HTTP/2 and advertises HTTP/3, so browsers load many files over one connection.
All 54 links work
All 54 links checked from your homepage (40 internal, 14 external) answered without errors; 12 did not answer within 5 s.
Domain and trust
No CAA record
medincus.pl has no CAA record, so any certificate authority may issue a certificate for it. A CAA record naming your provider (for example letsencrypt.org) closes that door.
DNSSEC is off
medincus.pl's DNS answers are not signed. DNSSEC stops attackers forging them to send visitors or email elsewhere; most registrars switch it on in a click, though most sites still run without it.
2 checks passed
Domain is 19 years old
19 yearsmedincus.pl was registered in Oct 2006 through home.pl sp. z o.o.. An established domain carries more trust with email providers and search engines.
Registered until Oct 2027
medincus.pl is registered until Oct 2027.
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 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 1,989 words of copy
The homepage carries about 1,989 words of visible text.
4 checks passed
10 short forms
10 short forms (4 fields at most) are right on the homepage.
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 53 testimonial or review blocks, 8 customer or partner logos and a star rating.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Analytics.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 4 phone links and 0 email links.
Email authentication
DMARC is monitor-only (p=none)
DMARC is set to p=none, so mail pretending to be medincus.pl is still delivered. Add a report address, check the reports, then move to quarantine.
No DKIM key on the usual selectors
We found no DKIM key on the selectors the big email providers use. If you send through one of them, turning on DKIM signing improves delivery.
Email authentication score: 65/100
Email authentication: SPF record 25 points, plus 15 when it ends in -all (10 for ~all); DMARC record 25, plus 25 for a reject policy (15 for quarantine); a DKIM key on a common selector 10.
1 checks passed
SPF with a strict ending (-all)
An SPF record lists your sending servers and tells receivers to reject anything else: “v=spf1 ip4:89.161.148.60 ip4:213.195.147.163 mx -all”.
Privacy and tracking
4 trackers load before any consent
4Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager and Meta Pixel (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.
1 cookie set on arrival
1Opening the homepage sets 1 cookie (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.
11 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 11 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
Upkeep, stack and company
- The footer still says © 2024.
Stack
- CMS
- WordPress 7.1.3
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Google Analytics
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This free review found 50 issues on medincus.pl, including 23 speed issues, 2 SEO issues and 2 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.