Website review, no card needed
rubrum.com.br website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 8 November 202651 issues · 85 checks
This review found 51 issues worth fixing on rubrum.com.br, 18 of them high impact, across 85 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
69DClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 4.2 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 3.8 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 4.0 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 3.9 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 3.8 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 3.7 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 4.5 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 5.2 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 5.2 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 5.3 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 5.5 s |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 5.4 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 180 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 179 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 154 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 126 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 120 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 114 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 121 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 135 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 135 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 138 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 254 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 262 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 279 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 286 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 290 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
0.5 s
1.0 s
1.5 s
1.9 s
2.4 s
2.9 s
3.4 s
3.9 s
Speed
Use efficient cache lifetimes
34.1 s · 15.8 MB62 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (15.8 MB).
Improve image delivery
8.8 s · 5.5 MB18 images could be 5.5 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 8.8 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
3.6 s16 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 3.6 s.
Reduce unused JavaScript
2.5 s · 508 KiBAbout 508 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.5 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 58
58/100Your mobile performance score is 58. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused CSS
750 ms · 161 KiBAbout 161 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 750 ms faster on a phone.
6 third-party services on the page
6 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Facebook and Google CDN and others), adding 943 KiB and 505 ms of main-thread time.
Font display
350 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 350 ms).
Google Tag Manager adds 295 ms
295 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 295 ms of main-thread work and 358 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.
Legacy JavaScript
300 ms · 13 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 13 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.
Google CDN adds 84 ms
84 msGoogle CDN costs a phone 84 ms of main-thread work and 349 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.
6 long tasks on the main thread
6 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 229 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Minify JavaScript
150 ms · 37 KiB37 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
Minify CSS
150 ms · 30 KiB30 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
Document request latency
47 KiBThe HTML itself could arrive sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.
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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.2 s
A phone's processor spends 1.2 s on main-thread work while loading, 525 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 136 ms
136 msYour server sent the HTML in 136 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: 4.2 s
4.2 sReal visitors see the first content after 4.2 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 51.8 s
51.8 sYour largest element takes 51.8 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
Time to Interactive: 52.9 s
52.9 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 52.9 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 3.8 s
3.8 sThe first text or image appears after 3.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Tap response (INP) got 60% slower for real visitors
+60%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 180 ms to 290 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) got 30% slower for real visitors
+30%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 4.2 s to 5.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Real-user TTFB: 1.5 s
1.5 sReal visitors wait 1.5 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Speed Index: 5.3 s
5.3 sVisually, the page fills in at 5.3 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
25 images without width and height
25 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Total Blocking Time: 281 ms
281 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 281 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
2 checks passed
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
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 16.6 MB in 77 requests
16.6 MBYour homepage downloads 16.6 MB in 77 requests on a phone: images 10.9 MB (39), media 4.0 MB (2) and scripts 1.1 MB (16). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
4 images over 500 KB
4 images weigh 8.5 MB together. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.
10 images far larger than shown
3.9 MB10 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example inspector.png at 2,476 px wide, shown at 350 px. Resized copies would save about 3.9 MB.
15 images in older formats
15 images (9.9 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.
16 images below the first screen load straight away
16 images further down the page (4.2 MB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 4.7 g of CO₂ per visit
4.70 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 4.70 g of CO₂e: 563.9 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
6 text elements with low contrast
6 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
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 (51 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 51 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.
5 links without text
5 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
2 form fields without a label
2 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4, h4 → h6 and h3 → h6), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
28 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 36 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 28 passed and 8 failed. 2 mores 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.
Title is long (82 characters)
Your title is 82 characters, so Google will cut it off around 60: “Rubrum Software - Gerenciamento de Embalagens e Fluxo de Aprovação de Artes-finais”.
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 XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at https://rubrumsoftware.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
Only 1 internal link
The homepage links to only 1 page on your own site, so visitors and crawlers find few routes into the rest of it.
2 links crawlers can't follow
2 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 incomplete here.
2 checks passed
Meta description: 87 characters
Your meta description is 87 characters: “Rubrum é um sistema web SaaS criado para gerenciar embalagens de forma simples e eficaz”.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place.
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 (1,351 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 pages share a title
/ and /politica_de_privacidade.html all use the title “Rubrum Software - Gerenciamento de Embalagens e Fluxo de Aprovação de…”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
1 page without an H1
/politica_de_privacidade.html has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
1 internal page checked
We fetched 1 page linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
5 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.
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
8 small tap targets
8 of 15 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
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”.
1 checks passed
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.
Phone number is not tap-to-call
Your phone number appears as text but isn't a tel: link, so phone visitors can't tap to call.
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 876 words of copy
The homepage carries about 876 words of visible text.
2 checks passed
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 8 testimonial or review blocks and 8 customer or partner logos.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics.
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.
5 cookies set on arrival
5Opening the homepage sets 5 cookies (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.
9 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 9 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 rubrum.com.br, 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
- Hosting
- AWS
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 51 issues on rubrum.com.br, including 23 speed issues, 8 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.