Website review, no card needed
rangam.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 1 November 202620 issues · 73 checks
This review found 20 issues worth fixing on rangam.com, 7 of them high impact, across 73 checks. The most urgent: use efficient cache lifetimes. 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
86BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 2.1 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.2 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.1 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 93 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 98 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 100 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 101 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 101 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 112 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 86 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 81 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 87 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 90 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 81 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 71 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
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1.4 s · 432 KiB23 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (432 KiB).
Render-blocking requests
1.1 s3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.1 s.
Mobile performance score: 74
74/100Your mobile performance score is 74. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused JavaScript
750 ms · 174 KiBAbout 174 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 750 ms faster on a phone.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (Optanon, Google Tag Manager and Hubspot and others), adding 571 KiB and 249 ms of main-thread time.
Reduce unused CSS
140 ms · 102 KiBAbout 102 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 140 ms faster on a phone.
1 long task on the main thread
1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 65 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Legacy JavaScript
22 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 22 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
Minify CSS
16 KiB16 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
Improve image delivery
13 KiB1 image could be 13 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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.8 s
A phone's processor spends 0.8 s on main-thread work while loading, 395 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
Largest Contentful Paint: 9.5 s
9.5 sYour largest element takes 9.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “We process your personal information to measure and improve…”.
Time to Interactive: 9.6 s
9.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 9.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
1 image without width and height
1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
12 checks passed
Passes Core Web Vitals for real visitors
Real Chrome users on phones pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)).
Real-user LCP: 1.6 s
1.6 sReal visitors wait 1.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 80 ms
80 msReal visitors wait 80 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.01
0.01For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.01 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 1.3 s
1.3 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.3 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 759 ms
759 msReal visitors wait 759 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Tap response (INP) got 26% faster for real visitors
-26%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 93 ms to 71 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) got 48% faster for real visitors
-48%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.1 s to 1.1 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Speed Index: 3.0 s
3.0 sVisually, the page fills in at 3.0 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.014
0.014The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.014, good is under 0.1).
First Contentful Paint: 0.8 s
0.8 sThe first text or image appears after 0.8 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.
Total Blocking Time: 15 ms
15 msScripts block the page for only 15 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
Page weight: 2.6 MB in 52 requests
2.6 MBYour homepage downloads 2.6 MB in 52 requests on a phone: media 1.7 MB (1), scripts 600 KiB (17) and fonts 142 KiB (3). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
About 0.8 g of CO₂ per visit
0.75 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.75 g of CO₂e: 90.1 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
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (1 element).
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 1 image in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
38 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 38 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 38 passed and 0 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
No social preview image
No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.
1 link with vague text
1 link use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind it.
5 internal links, 0 external
The homepage links to 5 pages on rangam.com and 0 external pages.
6 checks passed
Meta description: 141 characters
Your meta description is 141 characters: “Rangam connects job seekers and employers through structured staffing services designed for speed, precision, and measu…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “What are you looking for today?”.
Title: 58 characters
Your title is a healthy 58 characters: “Staffing Services | Employment Solutions | Talent Strategy”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://rangam.com/.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://rangam.com/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://rangam.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.
1 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.
Other pages
1 page without a meta description
https://rangam.com/job-seeker-search-jobs-redirect has no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
4 pages without an H1
https://rangam.com/employers, https://rangam.com/msp, https://rangam.com/training and https://rangam.com/about have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
5 internal pages checked
We fetched 5 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
5 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 5 pages we checked loaded without an error.
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
Titles are unique
Every page we checked has its own title.
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 5 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
1 JavaScript error while loading
1 error was logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Failed to load resource: net::ERR_FAILED”.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
9 of 11 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 direct contact details
No phone number or email link on the homepage, so ready-to-buy visitors have one fewer way to reach you.
Only about 76 words
The homepage has only about 76 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
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.
1 checks passed
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Analytics.
Privacy and tracking
5 trackers load before any consent
5Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot and LinkedIn Insight (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.
9 cookies set on arrival
9Opening the homepage sets 9 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
20 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 20 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 rangam.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Google Analytics
- Hosting
- HubSpot
Company
- Employees
- 318
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 20 issues on rangam.com, including 7 speed issues, 3 SEO issues and 5 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.