Website review, no card needed
pagar.me website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 27 October 202634 issues · 83 checks
This review found 34 issues worth fixing on pagar.me, 19 of them high impact, across 83 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
78CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| 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 | 2.1 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.4 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 2.2 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 181 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 184 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 182 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 179 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 182 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 182 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 180 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 185 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 181 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 181 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 180 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 179 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 186 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 189 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 188 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 185 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 180 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 180 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 179 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 179 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 205 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 219 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 223 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 227 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
1.4 s · 1.7 MBAbout 1.7 MB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.4 s faster on a phone.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1.3 s · 553 KiB48 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (553 KiB).
YouTube adds 1.1 s
1.1 sYouTube costs a phone 1.1 s of main-thread work and 1.9 MB 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: 37
37/100Your mobile performance score is 37 (desktop: 61). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Main-thread work: 5.5 s
A phone's processor spends 5.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 3.0 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (YouTube, Google Tag Manager and Facebook and others), adding 3.2 MB and 2.3 s of main-thread time.
Google Tag Manager adds 667 ms
667 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 667 ms of main-thread work and 722 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.
20 long tasks on the main thread
20 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 272 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 143 KiBAbout 143 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.
Legacy JavaScript
250 ms · 32 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 32 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 250 ms faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
250 ms1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 250 ms.
Improve image delivery
56 KiB3 images could be 56 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
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: 10 ms
10 msYour server sent the HTML in 10 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.
Time to Interactive: 28.6 s
28.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 28.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 5.9 s
5.9 sYour largest element takes 5.9 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “VENDA ONLINE MENOS TAXAS MAIS LUCRO”.
Total Blocking Time: 1.4 s
1.4 sScripts block taps and scrolling for 1.4 s in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Speed Index: 8.7 s
8.7 sVisually, the page fills in at 8.7 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
First Contentful Paint: 4.2 s
4.2 sThe first text or image appears after 4.2 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Tap response (INP) got 23% slower for real visitors
+23%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 181 ms to 227 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
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: 1.1 s
1.1 sReal visitors wait 1.1 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-2%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.3 s to 2.2 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
4 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 1.9 s
1.9 sReal visitors wait 1.9 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 150 ms
150 msReal visitors wait 150 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.
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: 4.2 MB in 146 requests
4.2 MBYour homepage downloads 4.2 MB in 146 requests on a phone: scripts 3.3 MB (57), fonts 258 KiB (7) and images 204 KiB (22). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
About 1.2 g of CO₂ per visit
1.19 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.19 g of CO₂e: 142.9 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
3 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.
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
1 button without a name
1 button has no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.
4 text elements with low contrast
4 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
Scrollable region must have keyboard access (2 elements)
Scrollable region must have keyboard access: 2 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
13 images without alt text
13 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (18 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 18 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.
5 links without text
5 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
1 checks passed
40 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: 40 passed and 7 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
Title is long (73 characters)
Your title is 73 characters, so Google will cut it off around 60: “Pagar.me | Pagar.me agora é Stone | Pagamentos online e gestão financeira”.
12 links crawlers can't follow
12 links have no real href, so search engines can't follow them.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is set, so this is minor.
11 internal links, 20 external
The homepage links to 11 pages on pagar.me and 20 external pages.
7 checks passed
Meta description: 128 characters
Your meta description is 128 characters: “No Pagar.me, conectamos milhares de sites e aplicativos a toda a cadeia de pagamentos e tiramos a complexidade de vende…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “VENDA ONLINE MENOS TAXAS MAIS LUCRO”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.pagar.me/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: FAQPage.
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.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.pagar.me/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 https://www.pagar.me/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 (894 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
1 internal page checked
We fetched 1 page linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
7 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 1 page 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 1 page 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 1 page that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
5 third-party cookies
5 third-party cookies are set on load; browsers are restricting these, so whatever relies on them breaks.
1 JavaScript error while loading
1 error was logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Uncaught ReferenceError: getip is not defined”.
Browser-reported issues
Chrome logged issues while loading the page (“Cookie”).
Missing source maps
Large scripts ship without source maps.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
11 of 13 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
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 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 520 words of copy
The homepage carries about 520 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
2 short forms
2 short forms (0 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: 1 phone link and 0 email links.
Privacy and tracking
7 trackers load before any consent
7Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Amplitude, Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager and LinkedIn Insight and 2 mores (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.
14 cookies set on arrival
14Opening the homepage sets 14 cookies, 1 of them by other companies (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.
43 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 43 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 pagar.me, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Framework
- Tailwind CSS
- Analytics
- Google Analytics | Google Tag Manager
- Hosting
- AWS
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 34 issues on pagar.me, including 17 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.