Website review, no card needed
sciencefromscientists.org website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 22 October 202641 issues · 81 checks
This review found 41 issues worth fixing on sciencefromscientists.org, 17 of them high impact, across 81 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
73C- #69,140 of 93,206 reviewed websitesbeats 22%
- #40,760 of 49,724 online storesbeats 15%
- #1,343 of 2,208 WooCommerce storesbeats 33%
Closest competitors among WooCommerce stores
Compare side by sideOne score from every part of this review. How it works
How it loaded on a phone
1.1 s
2.3 s
3.4 s
4.5 s
5.6 s
6.8 s
7.9 s
9.0 s
Speed
Use efficient cache lifetimes
5.7 s · 6.4 MB113 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (6.4 MB).
Render-blocking requests
4.1 s29 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 4.1 s.
Mobile performance score: 48
48/100Your mobile performance score is 48 (desktop: 68). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Reduce unused JavaScript
750 ms · 983 KiBAbout 983 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.
Improve image delivery
450 ms · 1,023 KiB10 images could be 1,023 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (YouTube, Google Tag Manager and Facebook and others), adding 1.8 MB and 836 ms of main-thread time.
Reduce unused CSS
750 ms · 250 KiBAbout 250 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.
YouTube adds 374 ms
374 msYouTube costs a phone 374 ms of main-thread work and 975 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.
Main-thread work: 3.8 s
A phone's processor spends 3.8 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.4 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
Google Tag Manager adds 243 ms
243 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 243 ms of main-thread work and 355 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.
2,152 HTML elements
The page has 2,152 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.
10 long tasks on the main thread
10 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 200 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Minify CSS
150 ms · 13 KiB13 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
Minify JavaScript
16 KiB16 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
Legacy JavaScript
12 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 12 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.
1 checks passed
Server response: 30 ms
30 msYour server sent the HTML in 30 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Largest Contentful Paint: 13.5 s
13.5 sYour largest element takes 13.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Our signature program sends real scientists into classrooms…”.
Time to Interactive: 19.3 s
19.3 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 19.3 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 12.5 s
12.5 sVisually, the page fills in at 12.5 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
First Contentful Paint: 4.5 s
4.5 sThe first text or image appears after 4.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Total Blocking Time: 362 ms
362 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 362 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Not enough real-visitor data yet
Chrome's UX Report (opens in a new tab) has too little real-visitor traffic for this site, so the figures here are lab measurements from Google's test phone on a throttled 4G connection.
1 checks passed
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 8.1 MB in 154 requests
8.1 MBYour homepage downloads 8.1 MB in 154 requests on a phone: images 5.2 MB (38), scripts 2.1 MB (55) and fonts 368 KiB (10). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
8 images in older formats
8 images (667 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.
About 2.3 g of CO₂ per visit
2.29 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 2.29 g of CO₂e: 274.6 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
2 checks passed
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
15 text elements with low contrast
15 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
Links look like plain text
2 links inside paragraphs rely on colour alone to stand out.
Orphan list items
Some list items are not inside a list.
Hidden but focusable
1 element hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.
Frames without titles
1 frame has no title, so screen-reader users cannot tell what it contains.
Malformed lists
Some lists contain elements other than list items, which screen readers announce wrongly.
1 tap target too small
1 tap target is too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
10 images without alt text
10 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
Main landmark should not be contained in another landmark (1 element)
Main landmark should not be contained in another landmark: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Document should not have more than one main landmark (1 element)
Document should not have more than one main landmark: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination (1 element)
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Zoom is disabled
The viewport tag blocks pinch-zoom, which low-vision visitors rely on.
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.
1 link without text
1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4 and h2 → h5), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
1 checks passed
46 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 60 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 46 passed and 14 failed. 4 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.
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
24 links crawlers can't follow
24 links have no real href, so search engines can't follow them.
Meta description is long (219 characters)
Your meta description is 219 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
No social preview image
No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.
No XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at http://sciencefromscientists.org/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
177 internal links, 15 external
The homepage links to 177 pages on sciencefromscientists.org and 15 external pages.
3 checks passed
Title: 59 characters
Your title is a healthy 59 characters: “Science from Scientists - STEM Education by real scientists”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://sciencefromscientists.org/.
robots.txt in place
robots.txt is in place and points crawlers to your sitemap.
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://sciencefromscientists.org/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 (1,091 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 38 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
1 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 15 pages we checked loaded without an error.
Best practices
5 third-party cookies
5 third-party cookies are set on load; browsers are restricting these, so whatever relies on them breaks.
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
12 of 14 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
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 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 543 words of copy
The homepage carries about 543 words of visible text.
Urgency cues
The page uses urgency cues (a countdown or limited-time wording).
5 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Contact Us”.
11 calls to action
The homepage has 11 calls to action, for example “Demo-in-a-Box Solution”, “Shop our Amazon Wishlists” and “Custom Demo-in-a-Box Solution”.
2 short forms
2 short forms (5 fields at most) are right on the homepage, asking for an email.
Social proof on the page
Social proof on the homepage: 11 customer or partner logos and 1 trust badge.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Meta Pixel and HubSpot.
Privacy and tracking
2 trackers load before any consent
2Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads 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.
10 cookies set on arrival
10Opening the homepage sets 10 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.
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.
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 sciencefromscientists.org, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
- The footer still says © 2014.
Stack
- CMS
- WordPress
- Framework
- jQuery
- E-commerce
- WooCommerce
- 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 41 issues on sciencefromscientists.org, including 16 speed issues and 6 SEO issues. 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.