Website review, no card needed
tess.no website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 4 November 202629 issues · 77 checks
This review found 29 issues worth fixing on tess.no, 13 of them high impact, across 77 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) |
|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2026 | 3.4 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 3.0 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 3.0 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 2.9 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 2.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 3.0 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.9 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 2.6 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 2.8 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 2.7 s |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 2.8 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2026 | 131 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 138 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 138 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 138 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 133 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 133 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 136 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 137 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 137 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
Improve image delivery
2.0 s · 562 KiB5 images could be 562 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.0 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
2.1 s34 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 2.1 s.
Mobile performance score: 66
66/100Your mobile performance score is 66. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused JavaScript
450 ms · 243 KiBAbout 243 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
150 ms · 442 KiB14 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (442 KiB).
Google Tag Manager adds 295 ms
295 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 295 ms of main-thread work and 354 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 third-party services on the page
6 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Matomo and cookiebot.eu and others), adding 572 KiB and 407 ms of main-thread time.
Minify JavaScript
150 ms · 93 KiB93 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 47 KiBAbout 47 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.
3 long tasks on the main thread
3 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 155 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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.5 s
A phone's processor spends 1.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 602 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 57 ms
57 msYour server sent the HTML in 57 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: 5.2 s
5.2 sReal visitors wait 5.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 5.5 s
5.5 sReal visitors see the first content after 5.5 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 6.4 s
6.4 sReal visitors wait 6.4 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Largest Contentful Paint: 10.4 s
10.4 sYour largest element takes 10.4 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Din totalleverandør Spesialister på slanger og tilhørende t…”.
Time to Interactive: 11.5 s
11.5 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 11.5 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Real-user CLS: 0.13
0.13For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.13 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Speed Index: 5.6 s
5.6 sVisually, the page fills in at 5.6 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
First Contentful Paint: 2.4 s
2.4 sThe first text or image appears after 2.4 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
2 images without width and height
2 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
+2%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 131 ms to 137 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
4 checks passed
Real-user INP: 94 ms
94 msReal visitors wait 94 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Largest content (LCP) got 15% faster for real visitors
-15%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 3.4 s to 2.8 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Total Blocking Time: 144 ms
144 msScripts block the page for only 144 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.002
0.002The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.002, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 3.2 MB in 105 requests
3.2 MBYour homepage downloads 3.2 MB in 105 requests on a phone: images 1.5 MB (19), scripts 916 KiB (39) and fonts 591 KiB (4). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
2 images far larger than shown
105 KiB2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example United-Kingdom_ny.jpg at 276 px wide, shown at 25 px. Resized copies would save about 105 KiB.
3 images in older formats
3 images (146 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.
3 images below the first screen load straight away
3 images further down the page (146 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 0.9 g of CO₂ per visit
0.90 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.90 g of CO₂e: 107.6 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
5 text elements with low contrast
5 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
Scrollable region must have keyboard access (1 element)
Scrollable region must have keyboard access: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
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.
29 links without text
29 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 37 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
49 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 54 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 49 passed and 5 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
Title is short (11 characters)
Your title is only 11 characters: “Hjem – TESS”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
Structured data has 4 problems
Structured data found (BreadcrumbList, ImageObject, Organization and WebPage) but with 4 problems, for example “WebPage: thumbnailUrl is not an absolute URL ("https://tess.no/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Bunkringstrommel-Sirevag…”.
No robots.txt
There is no robots.txt at tess.no/robots.txt, the first file search crawlers ask for.
111 internal links, 21 external
The homepage links to 111 pages on tess.no and 21 external pages.
5 checks passed
Meta description: 135 characters
Your meta description is 135 characters: “TESS selger slanger og MRO/DVHP-produkter til storindustri og offshore. 140 servicesentre i Norge og skreddersydde fors…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Spesialister på slanger og tilhørende tjenester i over 50 år”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://tess.no/.
Open Graph tags complete
Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.
XML sitemap found
Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://tess.no/sitemap.xml.
AI search readiness
4 checks passed
AI answer engines may read the site
There is no robots.txt, so nothing stops the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity from reading the site and cite it in answers.
Organization data: 4 of 6 facts
Your Organization JSON-LD gives name, url, logo and sameAs (social profiles); description and contact details would complete it.
Text is in the HTML
Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (472 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
llms.txt published
The site publishes https://tess.no/llms.txt (16 KiB, 102 links), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.
Other pages
10 pages without a meta description
https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering, https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering/on-site-service, https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering/produkter-og-systemer, https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering/produkter-og-systemer/bunkringsstasjoner, https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering/produkter-og-systemer/hpu-og-flusheenheter and https://tess.no/tjenester/engineering/produkter-og-systemer/remote-loading and 4 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 91 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
6 checks passed
Linked pages load
12 pages of 15 loaded without an error (the rest turned automated requests away).
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
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 12 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
3 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Tap targets are thumb-sized
23 of 25 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 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.
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 393 words of copy
The homepage carries about 393 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
1 short form
A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 2 phone links and 0 email links.
Privacy and tracking
3 trackers load before any consent
3Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (Cookiebot) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
1 cookie set on arrival
1Opening the homepage sets 1 cookie (measured from a US location before any click).
8 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 8 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: Cookiebot
A consent management tool (Cookiebot) 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 tess.no, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- CMS
- WordPress
- Framework
- jQuery
- Analytics
- Google Tag Manager
- Hosting
- Cloudflare
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 29 issues on tess.no, including 16 speed issues, 3 SEO issues and 3 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.