Website review, no card needed

simtek.com logo

simtek.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 21 October 202640 issues · 90 checks

This review found 40 issues worth fixing on simtek.com, 13 of them high impact, across 90 checks. The most urgent: fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.

  1. Homepage
  2. Phone render
  3. Links and pages
  4. Google PageSpeed

Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
2.1 s1.4 sMay 2Oct 171.6 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 2, 20261.7 s
May 9, 20261.8 s
May 16, 20261.7 s
May 23, 20261.7 s
May 30, 20261.9 s
Jun 6, 20261.9 s
Jun 13, 20261.9 s
Jun 20, 20262.0 s
Jun 27, 20261.8 s
Jul 4, 20261.7 s
Jul 11, 20261.7 s
Jul 18, 20261.6 s
Jul 25, 20261.6 s
Aug 1, 20261.5 s
Aug 8, 20261.5 s
Aug 15, 20261.6 s
Aug 22, 20261.7 s
Aug 29, 20261.7 s
Sep 5, 20261.8 s
Sep 12, 20261.7 s
Sep 19, 20261.6 s
Sep 26, 20261.5 s
Oct 3, 20261.5 s
Oct 10, 20261.5 s
Oct 17, 20261.6 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
97 ms86 msMay 2Oct 1789 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 2, 202694 ms
May 9, 202694 ms
May 16, 202690 ms
May 23, 202692 ms
May 30, 202691 ms
Jun 6, 202691 ms
Jun 13, 202691 ms
Jun 20, 202693 ms
Jun 27, 202692 ms
Jul 4, 202694 ms
Jul 11, 202695 ms
Jul 18, 202693 ms
Jul 25, 202693 ms
Aug 1, 202687 ms
Aug 8, 202687 ms
Aug 15, 202689 ms
Aug 22, 202689 ms
Aug 29, 202694 ms
Sep 5, 202696 ms
Sep 12, 202694 ms
Sep 19, 202694 ms
Sep 26, 202689 ms
Oct 3, 202689 ms
Oct 10, 202689 ms
Oct 17, 202689 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

Full-page screenshot of simtek.com (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. simtek.com at 0.5 s0.5 s
  2. simtek.com at 1.0 s1.0 s
  3. simtek.com at 1.4 s1.4 s
  4. simtek.com at 1.9 s1.9 s
  5. simtek.com at 2.4 s2.4 s
  6. simtek.com at 2.9 s2.9 s
  7. simtek.com at 3.4 s3.4 s
  8. simtek.com at 3.8 s3.8 s

Speed

4 to fix51
  • Mobile performance score: 51

    51/100

    Your mobile performance score is 51 (desktop: 92). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    300 ms · 100 KiB

    About 100 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 300 ms faster on a phone.

  • Render-blocking requests

    350 ms

    3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 350 ms.

  • Improve image delivery

    255 KiB

    3 images could be 255 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    150 ms · 16 KiB

    About 16 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.

  • Document request latency

    105 KiB

    The HTML itself could arrive sooner: redirects, a slow server response or missing compression delay everything after it.

  • 4 third-party services on the page

    4 third-party services load with your homepage (piwik.pro, Unpkg and JSDelivr CDN and others), adding 274 KiB and 71 ms of main-thread time.

  • 1 long task on the main thread

    1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 51 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    18 KiB

    2 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (18 KiB).

  • Phones get a much slower page than desktops

    Desktop scores 92 but mobile only 51. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.

  • Minify JavaScript

    7 KiB

    7 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

  • 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: 0.7 s

    A phone's processor spends 0.7 s on main-thread work while loading, 161 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 355 ms

    355 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 355 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

10 to fix67
  • 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 CLS: 0.31

    0.31

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.31 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 6.9 s

    6.9 s

    Your largest element takes 6.9 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.

  • Speed Index: 6.7 s

    6.7 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 6.7 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.298

    0.298

    The layout shifts by 0.298 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.8 s

    1.8 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.8 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.4 s

    1.4 s

    Real visitors wait 1.4 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Time to Interactive: 7.0 s

    7.0 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 7.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • First Contentful Paint: 2.8 s

    2.8 s

    The first text or image appears after 2.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • 1 image without width and height

    1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    -5%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 94 ms to 89 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

4 checks passed
  • Real-user LCP: 2.3 s

    2.3 s

    Real visitors wait 2.3 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 102 ms

    102 ms

    Real visitors wait 102 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Largest content (LCP) got 11% faster for real visitors

    -11%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.7 s to 1.6 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Total Blocking Time: 1 ms

    1 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 1 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

Images and page weight

3 to fix81
  • An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded

    Website-Header-graphic-toolfinder3_2~-~media--5abec06c--quer is on the first screen but marked loading="lazy", so the browser waits before fetching it and the page looks finished later. Load it eagerly (and give it fetchpriority="high" if it is the main image).

  • 5 images in older formats

    5 images (927 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.

  • 1 image below the first screen load straight away

    1 image further down the page (436 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.

  • About 0.5 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.51 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.51 g of CO₂e: 61.2 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

2 checks passed
  • Page weight: 1.8 MB in 33 requests

    1.8 MB

    Your homepage downloads 1.8 MB in 33 requests on a phone: images 1.3 MB (15), scripts 241 KiB (9) and HTML 158 KiB (1). That is a lean page.

  • Images are sized for phones

    No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.

Accessibility

11 to fixGoogle 7385
  • 4 buttons without a name

    4 buttons have no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.

  • 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.

  • 2 tap targets too small

    2 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.

  • Hidden but focusable

    1 element hidden from screen readers can still receive keyboard focus.

  • <html> element must have a valid value for the lang attribute (1 element)

    <html> element must have a valid value for the lang attribute: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.

  • Malformed lists

    Some lists contain elements other than list items, which screen readers announce wrongly.

  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (16 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 16 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.

  • 4 form fields without a label

    4 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.

  • 1 link without text

    1 visible link has no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where it goes.

  • Page language is “de_DE”

    The page declares lang=“de_DE”, which is not a usable language code, so screen readers and translation tools guess.

2 checks passed
  • Every image has alt text

    All 21 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 44 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 53 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 44 passed and 9 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

2 to fixGoogle 10092
  • 2 H1 headlines

    There are 2 <h1> headlines (“Intelligente Spanbrecher von SIMTEK” and “SIMTEK Toolfinder”). One clear main headline is easier for people and search engines.

  • 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.

  • 174 internal links, 7 external

    The homepage links to 174 pages on simtek.com and 7 external pages.

6 checks passed
  • Meta description: 123 characters

    Your meta description is 123 characters: “Entdecken Sie über 10.000 Präzisionswerkzeuge von SIMTEK für höchste Anforderungen! ➤ Jetzt passende Werkzeuglösung fin…”.

  • Title: 39 characters

    Your title is a healthy 39 characters: “Präzisionswerkzeuge von SIMTEK | SIMTEK”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://www.simtek.com/de_DE/Startseite.

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: Organization.

  • 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://simtek.com/sitemap.xml.

AI search readiness

100
  • No llms.txt

    There is no https://www.simtek.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.

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.

  • Organization data: 5 of 6 facts

    Your Organization JSON-LD gives name, url, sameAs (social profiles), description and contact details; logo would complete it.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (979 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

2 to fix88
  • 2 pages share a title

    https://www.simtek.com/en_DE/home and https://www.simtek.com/it_IT all use the title “Home | SIMTEK”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

  • 1 page without an H1

    https://www.simtek.com/de_DE/kontakt has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.

  • 15 internal pages checked

    We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 81 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

5 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.

  • 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

3 to fixGoogle 7785
  • 5 small tap targets

    5 of 16 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

  • Deprecated browser APIs

    The page uses 1 deprecated browser API that will stop working in future browsers (“Unload event listeners are deprecated and will be removed.”).

  • 1 JavaScript error while loading

    1 error was logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “One or more required elements for the slider are missing”.

1 checks passed
  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

5 to fix56
  • 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.

  • Local business without LocalBusiness data

    Your homepage shows a street address but no LocalBusiness JSON-LD, so Google and AI assistants have to guess your address, hours and phone from the page text.

  • No analytics detected

    No analytics or tag manager detected in the HTML, so you can't measure whether any of these fixes work.

  • A 8-field form

    Your longest form asks for 8 fields (7 required). Every extra field lowers completion.

  • No opening hours

    The homepage shows no opening hours. If customers visit or call, show when.

  • No map or directions link

    There is no link to Google or Apple Maps. A directions link is one tap for a phone visitor.

  • 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 645 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 645 words of visible text.

3 checks passed
  • Clear next step on the first screen

    On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Open contact form”.

  • Direct contact links

    Visitors can reach you directly: 3 phone links and 3 email links.

  • Phone number on the homepage

    Your phone number is on the homepage as a tap-to-call link.

Privacy and tracking

  • 4 cookies set on arrival

    4

    Opening the homepage sets 4 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.

  • 5 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 5 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

1 checks passed
  • No known trackers before consent

    No known advertising or analytics trackers load before a visitor clicks anything (measured from a US location before any click).

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 simtek.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
Tailwind CSS

Company

Founded
1987
Headquarters
Colorado Springs

Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 40 issues on simtek.com, including 14 speed issues, 2 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

By continuing you agree to the Terms and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

Free requests are written in the order they come in, so it can take a while. Pay $25 and yours is ready within a few hours. Either way you get a shareable link and a PDF.

  • No subscription
  • Free, or $25 to skip the line
  • Money-back guarantee

14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.

Get the full playbook · $25