Website review, no card needed
riosecreto.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 18 October 202647 issues · 92 checks
This review found 47 issues worth fixing on riosecreto.com, 19 of them high impact, across 92 checks. The most urgent: improve image delivery. 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
72CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| May 2, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.6 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2026 | 98 ms |
| May 2, 2026 | 102 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 97 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 101 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 107 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 110 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 112 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 109 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 112 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
Improve image delivery
5.0 s · 928 KiB9 images could be 928 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 5.0 s faster on a phone.
Reduce unused JavaScript
4.8 s · 913 KiBAbout 913 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 4.8 s faster on a phone.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
2.2 s · 268 KiB20 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (268 KiB).
Render-blocking requests
1.4 s17 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.4 s.
Mobile performance score: 48
48/100Your mobile performance score is 48 (desktop: 54). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, YouTube and Facebook and others), adding 1.9 MB and 990 ms of main-thread time.
YouTube adds 382 ms
382 msYouTube costs a phone 382 ms of main-thread work and 978 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 409 ms
409 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 409 ms of main-thread work and 701 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 unused CSS
300 ms · 128 KiBAbout 128 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.
Legacy JavaScript
150 ms · 12 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 12 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
12 long tasks on the main thread
12 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 139 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
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.
Minify JavaScript
5 KiB5 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.8 s
A phone's processor spends 1.8 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.1 s of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 26 ms
26 msYour server sent the HTML in 26 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.
Largest Contentful Paint: 22.1 s
22.1 sYour largest element takes 22.1 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “Río Secreto Promotions”.
First Contentful Paint: 7.0 s
7.0 sThe first text or image appears after 7.0 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Time to Interactive: 22.1 s
22.1 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 22.1 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 7.0 s
7.0 sVisually, the page fills in at 7.0 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Real-user CLS: 0.22
0.22For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.22 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user TTFB: 841 ms
841 msReal visitors wait 841 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Total Blocking Time: 406 ms
406 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 406 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
21 images without width and height
21 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) got 10% slower for real visitors
+10%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-10, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 98 ms to 112 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+3%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-10, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.5 s to 1.6 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: 113 ms
113 msReal visitors wait 113 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user FCP: 1.4 s
1.4 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.4 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
1 image over 500 KB
summer-2026-ING.jpg weighs 512 KiB. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.
Page weight: 3.5 MB in 84 requests
3.5 MBYour homepage downloads 3.5 MB in 84 requests on a phone: scripts 1.8 MB (27), images 1.3 MB (25) and stylesheets 98 KiB (10). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
6 images in older formats
6 images (1.2 MB) 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.
2 images far larger than shown
441 KiB2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example summer-2026-ING.jpg at 2,000 px wide, shown at 390 px. Resized copies would save about 441 KiB.
2 images below the first screen load straight away
2 images further down the page (65 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 1.0 g of CO₂ per visit
0.98 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.98 g of CO₂e: 117.9 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
Unlabelled dropdowns
5 dropdowns have no label.
18 text elements with low contrast
18 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
<html> element must have a lang attribute (1 element)
<html> element must have a lang attribute: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
1 tap target too small
1 tap target is too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
12 images without alt text
12 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (11 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 11 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.
Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)
Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
10 form fields without a label
10 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
6 links without text
6 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
No page language
The <html> element has no lang attribute, so screen readers may read the page in the wrong voice and accent.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h6), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
34 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 45 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 34 passed and 11 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
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.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
22 internal links, 10 external
The homepage links to 22 pages on riosecreto.com and 10 external pages.
4 checks passed
Meta description: 128 characters
Your meta description is 128 characters: “Come and experience this stunning underground river with thousands of dramatic stalactites and stalagmites. Come to Rio…”.
Title: 49 characters
Your title is a healthy 49 characters: “Rio Secreto Mexico Tours | Eco tours Riviera Maya”.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.riosecreto.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://www.riosecreto.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.
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 (2,127 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
10 pages share 3 titles
/, https://www.riosecreto.com/contactanos.asp and https://www.riosecreto.com/dev/tours.asp all use the title “Rio Secreto Mexico Tours | Eco tours Riviera Maya”, and 2 other titles repeat too. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
6 pages without a meta description
https://www.riosecreto.com/contactus.asp, https://www.riosecreto.com/proc/shopcart.asp, https://www.riosecreto.com/gallery.asp, https://www.riosecreto.com/groups-and-conventions.asp, https://www.riosecreto.com/environment-protection.asp and https://www.riosecreto.com/about.asp have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
4 pages share a meta description
https://www.riosecreto.com/contactanos.asp and https://www.riosecreto.com/dev/tours.asp use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
2 pages without an H1
https://www.riosecreto.com/contactanos.asp and https://www.riosecreto.com/dev/tours.asp have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
11 internal pages checked
We fetched 11 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
4 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 11 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.
Every page has a title
All 10 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
3 broken images
3 images failed to load on a phone, for example https://www.riosecreto.com/fbapp/assets/img/logo.png.
5 third-party cookies
5 third-party cookies are set on load; browsers are restricting these, so whatever relies on them breaks.
9 low-resolution images
9 images are served at too low a resolution for sharp phone screens.
Browser-reported issues
Chrome logged issues while loading the page (“Cookie”).
3 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Tap targets are thumb-sized
13 of 15 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
No social proof
No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust you.
Only about 228 words
The homepage has only about 228 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
6 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Contact us”.
3 calls to action
The homepage has 3 calls to action, for example “CONTACT US”, “Contact us” and “Contact Us”.
3 short forms
3 short forms (7 fields at most) are right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics and Meta Pixel.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 4 phone links and 3 email links.
Risk reducer mentioned
A guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card or similar) is mentioned on the page.
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.
9 cookies set on arrival
9Opening the homepage sets 9 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.
22 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 22 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 riosecreto.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 | 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 47 issues on riosecreto.com, including 18 speed issues, 4 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.