Website review, no card needed
salv.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 24 October 202620 issues · 74 checks
This review found 20 issues worth fixing on salv.com, 8 of them high impact, across 74 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
83BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 5.4 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 5.8 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 5.7 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 5.6 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 5.4 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 5.2 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 5.5 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 5.8 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 6.1 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 6.5 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 6.1 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 6.0 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 6.1 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 6.2 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 6.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 6.4 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 6.3 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 6.2 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 6.3 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 6.3 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 6.5 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 6.2 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 6.0 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 5.8 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 5.4 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 89 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 93 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 92 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 89 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 88 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 89 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 99 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 115 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 112 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 108 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 97 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 95 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 96 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 94 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 98 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 100 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 111 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 96 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
Render-blocking requests
1.9 s4 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.9 s.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
750 ms · 276 KiB22 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (276 KiB).
Mobile performance score: 65
65/100Your mobile performance score is 65 (desktop: 73). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused JavaScript
750 ms · 140 KiBAbout 140 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.
Reduce unused CSS
450 ms · 124 KiBAbout 124 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
Google Tag Manager adds 270 ms
270 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 270 ms of main-thread work and 315 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.
5 third-party services on the page
5 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Hubspot and cdn-cookieyes.com and others), adding 489 KiB and 414 ms of main-thread time.
6 long tasks on the main thread
6 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 142 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Improve image delivery
49 KiB2 images could be 49 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
Legacy JavaScript
13 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 13 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
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: 1.9 s
A phone's processor spends 1.9 s on main-thread work while loading, 781 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 2 ms
2 msYour server sent the HTML in 2 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: 5.4 s
5.4 sReal visitors wait 5.4 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 5.2 s
5.2 sReal visitors see the first content after 5.2 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 7.6 s
7.6 sYour largest element takes 7.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “We use cookies to make sure our website visitors get the an…”.
Time to Interactive: 7.6 s
7.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 7.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 5.0 s
5.0 sVisually, the page fills in at 5.0 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
First Contentful Paint: 2.3 s
2.3 sThe first text or image appears after 2.3 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Total Blocking Time: 252 ms
252 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 252 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Tap response (INP) got 11% slower for real visitors
+11%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 89 ms to 96 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+1%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 5.4 s to 5.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
4 checks passed
Real-user INP: 96 ms
96 msReal visitors wait 96 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.
Real-user TTFB: 744 ms
744 msReal visitors wait 744 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
About 0.2 g of CO₂ per visit
0.20 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.20 g of CO₂e: 24.0 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
4 checks passed
Page weight: 724 KiB in 44 requests
724 KiBYour homepage downloads 724 KiB in 44 requests on a phone: scripts 491 KiB (16), stylesheets 132 KiB (2) and images 70 KiB (13). That is a lean page.
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
2 text elements with low contrast
2 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 (1 element)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 14 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
43 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: 43 passed and 2 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
125 internal links, 3 external
The homepage links to 125 pages on salv.com and 3 external pages.
8 checks passed
Meta description: 158 characters
Your meta description is 158 characters: “Salv makes fraud and AML software for banks and fintechs: sanctions screening, transaction monitoring, risk scoring and…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Find and stop the financial crime moving through your data”.
Title: 52 characters
Your title is a healthy 52 characters: “Fraud and AML Software for Banks and Fintechs | Salv”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://salv.com/.
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://salv.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.
3 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 (1,698 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
llms.txt published
The site publishes https://salv.com/llms.txt (11 KiB, 44 links), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.
Other pages
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 34 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
7 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 15 pages 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 15 pages 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 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
2 JavaScript errors while loading
2 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Access to XMLHttpRequest at 'https://cloud.typography.com/7441736/6589812/css/fonts.css' from origin 'https://salv.com'…”.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
14 of 16 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 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 864 words of copy
The homepage carries about 864 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
3 calls to action
The homepage has 3 calls to action, for example “Contact us”.
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 26 testimonial or review blocks, 6 customer or partner logos and 1 trust badge.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics and Hotjar.
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 HubSpot (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (CookieYes) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
5 cookies set on arrival
5Opening the homepage sets 5 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
16 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 16 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: CookieYes
A consent management tool (CookieYes) 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 salv.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Analytics
- Google Analytics | Google Tag Manager | Hotjar
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 salv.com, including 14 speed 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.