Website review, no card needed

ug.edu.pl logo

ug.edu.pl website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 26 October 202632 issues · 80 checks

This review found 32 issues worth fixing on ug.edu.pl, 10 of them high impact, across 80 checks. The most urgent: render-blocking requests. 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
1.1 s888 msMay 9Oct 24996 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20261.0 s
May 16, 20261.1 s
May 23, 20261.1 s
May 30, 20261.1 s
Jun 6, 20261.1 s
Jun 13, 20261.1 s
Jun 20, 20261.0 s
Jun 27, 20261.0 s
Jul 4, 20261.0 s
Jul 11, 20261.1 s
Jul 18, 20261.1 s
Jul 25, 20261.0 s
Aug 1, 20261.0 s
Aug 8, 2026944 ms
Aug 15, 2026925 ms
Aug 22, 2026976 ms
Aug 29, 2026978 ms
Sep 5, 2026952 ms
Sep 12, 2026946 ms
Sep 19, 2026917 ms
Sep 26, 2026916 ms
Oct 3, 2026921 ms
Oct 10, 2026949 ms
Oct 17, 2026973 ms
Oct 24, 2026996 ms
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
120 ms88 msMay 9Oct 24116 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 202698 ms
May 16, 202696 ms
May 23, 202695 ms
May 30, 202695 ms
Jun 6, 202694 ms
Jun 13, 202695 ms
Jun 20, 202694 ms
Jun 27, 202694 ms
Jul 4, 202696 ms
Jul 11, 202695 ms
Jul 18, 202694 ms
Jul 25, 202693 ms
Aug 1, 202692 ms
Aug 8, 202692 ms
Aug 15, 202693 ms
Aug 22, 202694 ms
Aug 29, 202694 ms
Sep 5, 202695 ms
Sep 12, 202696 ms
Sep 19, 202697 ms
Sep 26, 202699 ms
Oct 3, 2026103 ms
Oct 10, 2026107 ms
Oct 17, 2026111 ms
Oct 24, 2026116 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 ug.edu.pl (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. ug.edu.pl at 0.6 s0.6 s
  2. ug.edu.pl at 1.2 s1.2 s
  3. ug.edu.pl at 1.8 s1.8 s
  4. ug.edu.pl at 2.4 s2.4 s
  5. ug.edu.pl at 3.0 s3.0 s
  6. ug.edu.pl at 3.6 s3.6 s
  7. ug.edu.pl at 4.1 s4.1 s
  8. ug.edu.pl at 4.7 s4.7 s

Speed

6 to fix53
  • Render-blocking requests

    3.9 s

    11 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 3.9 s.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    1.1 s · 1.3 MB

    61 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (1.3 MB).

  • Mobile performance score: 53

    53/100

    Your mobile performance score is 53 (desktop: 66). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • Improve image delivery

    456 KiB

    13 images could be 456 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

  • Font display

    400 ms

    Web fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 400 ms).

  • skynettechnologies.com adds 5 ms

    5 ms

    skynettechnologies.com costs a phone 5 ms of main-thread work and 410 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.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    150 ms · 94 KiB

    About 94 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.

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    122 KiB

    About 122 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page.

  • 2 third-party services on the page

    2 third-party services load with your homepage (skynettechnologies.com and Google Fonts), adding 664 KiB and 5 ms of main-thread time.

  • 1 long task on the main thread

    1 long task block the main thread while loading, the longest for 50 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Minify JavaScript

    12 KiB

    12 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    8 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 8 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.

2 checks passed
  • Main-thread work: 1.1 s

    A phone's processor spends 1.1 s on main-thread work while loading, 232 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 4 ms

    4 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 4 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

6 to fix100
  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.498

    0.498

    The layout shifts by 0.498 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.

  • First Contentful Paint: 3.8 s

    3.8 s

    The first text or image appears after 3.8 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • 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.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 4.0 s

    4.0 s

    Your largest element takes 4.0 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “Pożegnanie dr. Grzegorza Stunży”.

  • 30 images without width and height

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

  • Time to Interactive: 4.0 s

    4.0 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 4.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Tap response (INP) got 17% slower for real visitors

    +17%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 98 ms to 116 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    -6%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.0 s to 1.0 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

7 checks passed
  • Passes Core Web Vitals for real visitors

    Real Chrome users on phones pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)).

  • Real-user LCP: 1.2 s

    1.2 s

    Real visitors wait 1.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 103 ms

    103 ms

    Real visitors wait 103 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.00

    0.00

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.0 s

    1.0 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 487 ms

    487 ms

    Real visitors wait 487 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Total Blocking Time: 0 ms

    0 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

Images and page weight

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

    1270x580.jpg.webp 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).

  • 7 images below the first screen load straight away

    7 images further down the page (427 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.

  • 2 images far larger than shown

    44 KiB

    2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example 1270x580.jpg.webp at 1,270 px wide, shown at 390 px. Resized copies would save about 44 KiB.

  • About 0.5 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.55 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.55 g of CO₂e: 65.6 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: 1.9 MB in 105 requests

    1.9 MB

    Your homepage downloads 1.9 MB in 105 requests on a phone: images 1.1 MB (52), fonts 379 KiB (13) and scripts 328 KiB (24). That is a lean page.

  • Images use modern formats

    Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.

Accessibility

3 to fixGoogle 9597
  • All page content should be contained by landmarks (2 elements)

    All page content should be contained by landmarks: 2 elements on the page fail 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.

  • 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 → h4), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.

2 checks passed
  • Every image has alt text

    All 41 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 47 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 43 passed and 4 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

6 to fixGoogle 8570
  • No meta description

    No meta description, so Google writes its own snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • Title is short (21 characters)

    Your title is only 21 characters: “| Uniwersytet Gdański”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.

  • No structured data

    No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.

  • 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 XML sitemap

    No XML sitemap at https://ug.edu.pl/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • 1 link crawlers can't follow

    1 link has no real href, so search engines can't follow it.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.

  • 118 internal links, 37 external

    The homepage links to 118 pages on ug.edu.pl and 37 external pages.

3 checks passed
  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Uniwersytet Gdański - Strona Główna”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://ug.edu.pl/.

  • robots.txt in place

    robots.txt is in place.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88
  • 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://ug.edu.pl/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 (762 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

3 to fix85
  • 13 pages without a meta description

    https://ug.edu.pl/kandydaci, https://ug.edu.pl/kandydaci/studia-wspolne-w-ramach-sea-eu, https://ug.edu.pl/rekrutacja/szkoly_doktorskie, https://ug.edu.pl/kandydaci/studia-podyplomowe, https://ug.edu.pl/rekrutacja/kursy_i_szkolenia and https://ug.edu.pl/kandydaci/potwierdzanie-efektow-uczenia and 7 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • 1 link to non-canonical URLs

    Your homepage links to 1 page by a URL that isn't its canonical one, for example https://ug.edu.pl/kandydaci/potwierdzanie-efektow-uczenia, whose canonical is https://ug.edu.pl/pracownicy/strony_jednostek/biuro-jakosci-ksztalcenia/potwierdzanie-efektow-uczenia. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.

  • 1 page without an H1

    https://ug.edu.pl/rekrutacja/studia_i_i_ii_stopnia_oraz_jednolite_magisterskie 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 87 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

4 checks passed
  • Linked pages load

    All 15 pages we checked loaded without an error.

  • Titles are unique

    Every page we checked has its own title.

  • 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

1 to fixGoogle 10093
  • 11 small tap targets

    11 of 37 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

2 checks passed
  • No console errors

    No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

3 to fix40
  • 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 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 662 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 662 words of visible text.

2 checks passed
  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Analytics.

  • Direct contact links

    Visitors can reach you directly: 1 phone link and 1 email link.

Privacy and tracking

  • 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.

  • 4 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 4 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 ug.edu.pl, 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
Tailwind CSS
Analytics
Google Analytics
Hosting
Gdansk University of Technology

Company

Founded
1970
Headquarters
Oliva Campus

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

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 32 issues on ug.edu.pl, including 12 speed issues, 6 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

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