Website review, no card needed

umh.es logo

umh.es website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 30 October 202644 issues · 87 checks

This review found 44 issues worth fixing on umh.es, 14 of them high impact, across 87 checks. The most urgent: use efficient cache lifetimes. 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
1.6 s1.2 sMay 9Oct 241.5 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20261.5 s
May 16, 20261.5 s
May 23, 20261.4 s
May 30, 20261.4 s
Jun 6, 20261.4 s
Jun 13, 20261.4 s
Jun 20, 20261.3 s
Jun 27, 20261.4 s
Jul 4, 20261.3 s
Jul 11, 20261.3 s
Jul 18, 20261.3 s
Jul 25, 20261.3 s
Aug 1, 20261.3 s
Aug 8, 20261.3 s
Aug 15, 20261.4 s
Aug 22, 20261.4 s
Aug 29, 20261.4 s
Sep 5, 20261.4 s
Sep 12, 20261.3 s
Sep 19, 20261.4 s
Sep 26, 20261.4 s
Oct 3, 20261.4 s
Oct 10, 20261.5 s
Oct 17, 20261.5 s
Oct 24, 20261.5 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
124 ms109 msMay 9Oct 24118 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 2026111 ms
May 16, 2026114 ms
May 23, 2026113 ms
May 30, 2026112 ms
Jun 6, 2026112 ms
Jun 13, 2026112 ms
Jun 20, 2026112 ms
Jun 27, 2026112 ms
Jul 4, 2026112 ms
Jul 11, 2026111 ms
Jul 18, 2026112 ms
Jul 25, 2026114 ms
Aug 1, 2026117 ms
Aug 8, 2026120 ms
Aug 15, 2026121 ms
Aug 22, 2026121 ms
Aug 29, 2026122 ms
Sep 5, 2026121 ms
Sep 12, 2026119 ms
Sep 19, 2026118 ms
Sep 26, 2026119 ms
Oct 3, 2026119 ms
Oct 10, 2026121 ms
Oct 17, 2026121 ms
Oct 24, 2026118 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 umh.es (phone) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. umh.es at 0.4 s0.4 s
  2. umh.es at 0.8 s0.8 s
  3. umh.es at 1.1 s1.1 s
  4. umh.es at 1.5 s1.5 s
  5. umh.es at 1.9 s1.9 s
  6. umh.es at 2.3 s2.3 s
  7. umh.es at 2.6 s2.6 s
  8. umh.es at 3.0 s3.0 s

Speed

13 to fix30
  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    11.4 s · 252.9 MB

    583 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (252.9 MB).

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    15.2 s · 5.0 MB

    About 5.0 MB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 15.2 s faster on a phone.

  • YouTube adds 2.7 s

    2.7 s

    YouTube costs a phone 2.7 s of main-thread work and 18.4 MB of downloads while your page loads. That alone is enough to make taps feel slow. Loading it after the page is usable, or only on the pages that need it, takes that off the critical path.

  • Mobile performance score: 30

    30/100

    Your mobile performance score is 30. Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.

  • Main-thread work: 8.0 s

    A phone's processor spends 8.0 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.7 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.

  • 3 third-party services on the page

    3 third-party services load with your homepage (YouTube, Google Fonts and Google/Doubleclick Ads), adding 19.4 MB and 2.8 s of main-thread time.

  • Improve image delivery

    900 ms · 3.5 MB

    35 images could be 3.5 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 900 ms faster on a phone.

  • Render-blocking requests

    900 ms

    12 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 900 ms.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    600 ms · 77 KiB

    About 77 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 600 ms faster on a phone.

  • 20 long tasks on the main thread

    20 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 467 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

  • Minify CSS

    300 ms · 9 KiB

    9 KiB could be saved by minifying CSS.

  • 2,472 HTML elements

    The page has 2,472 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

  • Google Fonts adds 3 ms

    3 ms

    Google Fonts costs a phone 3 ms of main-thread work and 1.0 MB 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.

  • Minify JavaScript

    150 ms · 4 KiB

    4 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

  • Font display

    50 ms

    Web fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 50 ms).

  • 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: 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
  • First Contentful Paint: 26.5 s

    26.5 s

    The first text or image appears after 26.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 177.1 s

    177.1 s

    Your largest element takes 177.1 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Agenda. Conoce los eventos de tu universidad”.

  • Speed Index: 102.4 s

    102.4 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 102.4 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Time to Interactive: 271.0 s

    271.0 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 271.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Total Blocking Time: 1.3 s

    1.3 s

    Scripts block taps and scrolling for 1.3 s in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

  • 13 images without width and height

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

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    +6%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 111 ms to 118 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    +3%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.5 s to 1.5 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: 2.2 s

    2.2 s

    Real visitors wait 2.2 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user INP: 169 ms

    169 ms

    Real visitors wait 169 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.01

    0.01

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.01 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Real-user FCP: 1.4 s

    1.4 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.4 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 512 ms

    512 ms

    Real visitors wait 512 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0

    0

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).

Images and page weight

1 to fix70
  • Page weight: 272.5 MB in 752 requests

    272.5 MB

    Your homepage downloads 272.5 MB in 752 requests on a phone: images 251.5 MB (530), scripts 15.8 MB (77) and stylesheets 1.9 MB (65). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • About 77.2 g of CO₂ per visit

    77.23 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 77.23 g of CO₂e: 9268.1 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

3 checks passed
  • Images use modern formats

    Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.

  • 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

5 to fixGoogle 10095
  • Banner landmark should not be contained in another landmark (1 element)

    Banner 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 banner landmark (1 element)

    Document should not have more than one banner 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.

  • 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.

  • Users should be able to zoom and scale the text up to 500% (1 element)

    Users should be able to zoom and scale the text up to 500%: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.

2 checks passed
  • Every image has alt text

    All 20 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 48 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 43 passed and 5 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

7 to fixGoogle 9271
  • Title is short (22 characters)

    Your title is only 22 characters: “UMH - Página principal”. 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.

  • Meta description is short (37 characters)

    Your meta description is only 37 characters: “Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche”. 70 to 160 characters is enough to sell the click.

  • No canonical URL

    No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.

  • 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://www.umh.es/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

  • 11 links with vague text

    11 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

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

  • 132 internal links, 224 external

    The homepage links to 132 pages on umh.es and 224 external pages.

2 checks passed
  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Página principal”.

  • robots.txt in place

    robots.txt is in place.

AI search readiness

2 to fix53
  • robots.txt blocks 2 AI answer engine crawlers

    2 of 6

    Your robots.txt shuts out ChatGPT (ChatGPT-User) and Perplexity (PerplexityBot). These fetch pages to answer people's questions and cite the source, so your site can't be quoted or linked in those answers.

  • 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://www.umh.es/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.

  • Opted out of AI training for 3 crawlers

    robots.txt blocks GPTBot, ClaudeBot and CCBot, which collect pages to train models. That's a legitimate choice and doesn't by itself stop the site appearing in AI answers.

1 checks passed
  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (3,095 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

Other pages

3 to fix86
  • 15 pages share a title

    https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Grado/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Master_Oficial/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Doctorado/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Escuela_Facultad/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Otros_estudios/datos_es.html and https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:ServiciosEstudiantes/datos_es.html and 9 others all use the title “UMH - Universidad Miguel Hernández”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

  • 15 pages share a meta description

    https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Grado/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Master_Oficial/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Doctorado/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Escuela_Facultad/datos_es.html, https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Otros_estudios/datos_es.html and https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:ServiciosEstudiantes/datos_es.html and 9 others use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.

  • 9 links to non-canonical URLs

    Your homepage links to 9 pages by a URL that isn't their canonical one, for example https://www.umh.es/contenido/Investigacion/:Instituto_Investigacion/datos_es.html, whose canonical is https://www.umh.es/contenido/Estudios/:Instituto_Investigacion/datos_es.html. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.

  • 15 internal pages checked

    We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 97 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.

  • Every page has a meta description

    All 15 pages that loaded have a meta description.

  • 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 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.

Best practices

3 to fixGoogle 5888
  • 14 small tap targets

    14 of 32 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

  • 5 third-party cookies

    5 third-party cookies are set on load; browsers are restricting these, so whatever relies on them breaks.

  • 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.”).

  • Browser-reported issues

    Chrome logged issues while loading the page (“Cookie”).

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

4 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.

  • Thin social proof

    Social proof on the homepage: 7 customer or partner logos. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.

  • No analytics detected

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

  • 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 423 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 423 words of visible text.

1 checks passed
  • 1 short form

    A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage.

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.

  • 3 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 3 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 umh.es, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.

Upkeep, stack and company

Stack

Framework
jQuery
Hosting
AWS

Company

Employees
1,792
Founded
1997

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

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 44 issues on umh.es, including 19 speed issues, 7 SEO 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

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