Website review, no card needed
uceff.edu.br website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 28 October 202634 issues · 78 checks
This review found 34 issues worth fixing on uceff.edu.br, 14 of them high impact, across 78 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
74CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.4 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 9, 2026 | 263 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 256 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 258 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 260 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 262 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 258 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 273 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 283 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 280 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 289 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 274 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 257 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 248 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 242 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 246 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 254 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 250 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 251 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 245 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 253 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 261 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 265 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 279 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 275 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 267 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
0.4 s
0.8 s
1.2 s
1.6 s
2.0 s
2.4 s
2.8 s
3.2 s
Speed
Use efficient cache lifetimes
5.3 s · 1.8 MB16 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (1.8 MB).
Reduce unused JavaScript
3.6 s · 848 KiBAbout 848 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 3.6 s faster on a phone.
Improve image delivery
1.8 s · 890 KiB7 images could be 890 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.8 s faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
1.6 s1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 1.6 s.
Mobile performance score: 63
63/100Your mobile performance score is 63 (desktop: 71). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Google Tag Manager adds 311 ms
311 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 311 ms of main-thread work and 630 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, Facebook and Google Analytics and others), adding 892 KiB and 437 ms of main-thread time.
4 long tasks on the main thread
4 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 102 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.4 s
A phone's processor spends 1.4 s on main-thread work while loading, 584 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 4 ms
4 msYour server sent the HTML in 4 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.
Largest Contentful Paint: 15.7 s
15.7 sYour largest element takes 15.7 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “campanha benefícios para as empresas”.
Time to Interactive: 16.3 s
16.3 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 16.3 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 7.3 s
7.3 sVisually, the page fills in at 7.3 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Real-user INP: 308 ms
308 msReal visitors wait 308 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
First Contentful Paint: 2.9 s
2.9 sThe first text or image appears after 2.9 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
+4%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 263 ms to 267 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+2%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.4 s to 1.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
6 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 1.9 s
1.9 sReal visitors wait 1.9 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user CLS: 0.07
0.07For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.07 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 1.4 s
1.4 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.4 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 613 ms
613 msReal visitors wait 613 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Total Blocking Time: 94 ms
94 msScripts block the page for only 94 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 2.5 MB in 31 requests
2.5 MBYour homepage downloads 2.5 MB in 31 requests on a phone: images 1.4 MB (12), scripts 1.1 MB (8) and HTML 23 KiB (1). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
5 images in older formats
5 images (1.0 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.
5 images far larger than shown
149 KiB5 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example banner-site.jpg-1.jpeg at 1,200 px wide, shown at 371 px. Resized copies would save about 149 KiB.
About 0.7 g of CO₂ per visit
0.70 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.70 g of CO₂e: 83.7 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Images load when needed
Images below the first screen wait until the visitor scrolls to them.
Accessibility
13 buttons without a name
13 buttons have no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.
9 text elements with low contrast
9 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
9 tap targets too small
9 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (46 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 46 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.
ARIA role should be appropriate for the element (4 elements)
ARIA role should be appropriate for the element: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated minor by axe-core.
Elements marked as presentational should be consistently ignored (4 elements)
Elements marked as presentational should be consistently ignored: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated minor by axe-core.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 68 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
40 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 47 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 40 passed and 7 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
39 internal links, 24 external
The homepage links to 39 pages on uceff.edu.br and 24 external pages.
8 checks passed
Meta description: 136 characters
Your meta description is 136 characters: “Evolua com a maior instituição privada de ensino superior do oeste catarinense! Cursos de graduação, pós-gradução e pro…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “UCEFF - Unidade Central de Educação Faem Faculdade”.
Title: 50 characters
Your title is a healthy 50 characters: “UCEFF - Unidade Central de Educação Faem Faculdade”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.uceff.edu.br/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: BreadcrumbList, Organization, WebPage and WebSite.
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://www.uceff.edu.br/sitemap_index.xml.
AI search readiness
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.uceff.edu.br/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: 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 (628 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 pages share a title
https://www.uceff.edu.br/colegio-itapiranga and https://www.uceff.edu.br/colegio all use the title “Colégio Itapiranga - UCEFF”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
7 pages without a meta description
https://www.uceff.edu.br/curso/direito, https://www.uceff.edu.br/curso/enfermagem, https://www.uceff.edu.br/curso/estetica-e-cosmetica-semipresencial, https://www.uceff.edu.br/curso/medicina-veterinaria, https://www.uceff.edu.br/curso/processos-gerenciais-ead and https://www.uceff.edu.br/cast-uceff and 1 other have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
4 pages share a meta description
https://www.uceff.edu.br/graduacao and https://www.uceff.edu.br/pos-graduacao use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
1 link to non-canonical URLs
Your homepage links to 1 page by a URL that isn't its canonical one, for example https://www.uceff.edu.br/colegio, whose canonical is https://www.uceff.edu.br/colegio-itapiranga. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.
1 page without an H1
https://www.uceff.edu.br/bolsas-de-estudo has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
5 pages slow to respond
https://www.uceff.edu.br/pos-graduacao, https://www.uceff.edu.br/bolsas-de-estudo, https://www.uceff.edu.br/indique-e-ganhe, https://www.uceff.edu.br/news and https://www.uceff.edu.br/colegio took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 22 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
3 checks passed
Linked pages load
14 pages of 15 loaded without an error (the rest turned automated requests away).
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 14 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
7 small tap targets
7 of 24 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.
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 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 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 628 words of copy
The homepage carries about 628 words of visible text.
2 checks passed
1 short form
A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage, asking for an email.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics and Meta Pixel.
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.
6 cookies set on arrival
6Opening the homepage sets 6 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.
10 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 10 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 uceff.edu.br, 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 © 2024.
Stack
- Hosting
- Central de Educacao Faem Faculdade L
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 34 issues on uceff.edu.br, including 12 speed issues and 4 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.