Website review, no card needed
perfectcorp.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 25 October 202638 issues · 68 checks
This review found 38 issues worth fixing on perfectcorp.com, 10 of them high impact, across 68 checks. The most urgent: render-blocking 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 2, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 2.3 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 | 2.4 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.3 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.2 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.2 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 283 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 281 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 277 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 271 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 268 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 264 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 261 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 259 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 258 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 258 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 261 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 262 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 259 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 256 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 258 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 260 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 263 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 269 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 268 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 269 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 272 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 276 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 279 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 285 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 286 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
Render-blocking requests
1.5 s12 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.5 s.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
300 ms · 808 KiB26 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (808 KiB).
Mobile performance score: 87
87/100Your mobile performance score is 87 (desktop: 100). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Improve image delivery
584 KiB18 images could be 584 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
Reduce unused CSS
300 ms · 36 KiBAbout 36 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.
4 third-party services on the page
4 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Fonts, cloudfront.net and makeupar.com and others), adding 1.9 MB and 0 ms of main-thread time.
makeupar.com adds 0 ms
0 msmakeupar.com costs a phone 0 ms of main-thread work and 1.7 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.
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: 0.2 s
A phone's processor spends 0.2 s on main-thread work while loading, 6 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 1 ms
1 msYour server sent the HTML in 1 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.
Real-user LCP: 5.6 s
5.6 sReal visitors wait 5.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 3.0 s
3.0 sReal visitors see the first content after 3.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user INP: 386 ms
386 msReal visitors wait 386 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). 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.
57 images without width and height
57 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Largest Contentful Paint: 3.6 s
3.6 sYour largest element takes 3.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the element shown below.
First Contentful Paint: 2.4 s
2.4 sThe first text or image appears after 2.4 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
+1%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 283 ms to 286 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-6%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, 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).
5 checks passed
Real-user CLS: 0.09
0.09For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.09 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Time to Interactive: 3.7 s
3.7 sThe page is fully interactive after 3.7 s.
Speed Index: 2.4 s
2.4 sVisually, the page fills in at 2.4 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 0 ms
0 msScripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
11 images in older formats
11 images (984 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.
12 images below the first screen load straight away
12 images further down the page (1,012 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
3 images far larger than shown
237 KiB3 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example 1ad675a2-e847-4d2f-b1fa-9387e6e1ab31.jpg at 1,040 px wide, shown at 261 px. Resized copies would save about 237 KiB.
About 0.6 g of CO₂ per visit
0.55 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.55 g of CO₂e: 66.4 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Page weight: 2.0 MB in 57 requests
2.0 MBYour homepage downloads 2.0 MB in 57 requests on a phone: images 1.0 MB (38), media 730 KiB (1) and fonts 150 KiB (5). That is a lean page.
Accessibility
16 text elements with low contrast
16 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (21 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 21 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
87 form fields without a label
87 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
Hidden but focusable
27 elements hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.
1 link without text
1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.
ARIA role should be appropriate for the element (1 element)
ARIA role should be appropriate for the element: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.
No main landmark
The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.
1 checks passed
38 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 42 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 38 passed and 4 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.
No H1 headline
There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
No canonical URL
No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.
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.
Only 0 internal links
The homepage links to only 0 pages on your own site, so visitors and crawlers find few routes into the rest of it.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
3 checks passed
Title: 51 characters
Your title is a healthy 51 characters: “Beauty AR Company and Makeup AR Technology Platform”.
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.perfectcorp.com/sitemap.xml.
AI search readiness
Most text only appears after JavaScript runs
0%A phone browser shows 1,283 words, but the HTML your server sends has only 0. GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot read that HTML without running JavaScript, so they see an almost empty page. Server-side rendering or pre-rendering fixes it.
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.
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.
llms.txt published
The site publishes /llms.txt (1 KiB, 3 links), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.
Best practices
10 small tap targets
10 of 49 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
2 JavaScript errors while loading
2 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'ready')”.
1 checks passed
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
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 analytics detected
No analytics or tag manager detected in the HTML, so you can't measure whether any of these fixes work.
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.
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 1,283 words of copy
The homepage carries about 1,283 words of visible text.
1 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “TRY WEB DEMO”.
Privacy and tracking
6 trackers load before any consent
6Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot and LinkedIn Insight and 1 more (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (OneTrust) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
18 cookies set on arrival
18Opening the homepage sets 18 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
25 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 25 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: OneTrust
A consent management tool (OneTrust) loads with the page.
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 perfectcorp.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 38 issues on perfectcorp.com, including 15 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.