Website review, no card needed
usmed.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 25 October 202630 issues · 80 checks
This review found 30 issues worth fixing on usmed.com, 15 of them high impact, across 80 checks. The most urgent: reduce unused JavaScript. 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
76CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 2.0 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.9 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.8 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 2, 2026 | 213 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 211 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 213 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 211 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 214 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 216 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 212 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 213 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 208 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 203 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 205 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 207 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 212 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 211 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 213 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 212 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 215 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 220 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 211 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 204 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 199 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 198 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 197 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 196 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 194 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
Reduce unused JavaScript
2.6 s · 417 KiBAbout 417 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.6 s faster on a phone.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
2.4 s · 442 KiB13 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (442 KiB).
Render-blocking requests
1.8 s23 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.8 s.
Mobile performance score: 45
45/100Your mobile performance score is 45 (desktop: 90). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.
Improve image delivery
600 ms · 696 KiB9 images could be 696 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 600 ms faster on a phone.
8 third-party services on the page
8 third-party services load with your homepage (osano.com, Accessibe Accessibility Overlay and Google Tag Manager and others), adding 934 KiB and 732 ms of main-thread time.
10 long tasks on the main thread
10 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 298 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Main-thread work: 2.3 s
A phone's processor spends 2.3 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.3 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 88 KiBAbout 88 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.
Legacy JavaScript
150 ms · 10 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 10 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
Font display
50 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 50 ms).
Phones get a much slower page than desktops
Desktop scores 90 but mobile only 45. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.
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 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: 14.7 s
14.7 sYour largest element takes 14.7 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Box”.
Time to Interactive: 14.7 s
14.7 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 14.7 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
First Contentful Paint: 5.1 s
5.1 sThe first text or image appears after 5.1 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Speed Index: 7.2 s
7.2 sVisually, the page fills in at 7.2 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Real-user INP: 207 ms
207 msReal visitors wait 207 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Total Blocking Time: 572 ms
572 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 572 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors
-8%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 213 ms to 194 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
-7%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-17, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 2.0 s to 1.8 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
5 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 1.4 s
1.4 sReal visitors wait 1.4 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user CLS: 0.01
0.01For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.01 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Real-user FCP: 1.3 s
1.3 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.3 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 566 ms
566 msReal visitors wait 566 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 2.2 MB in 108 requests
2.2 MBYour homepage downloads 2.2 MB in 108 requests on a phone: scripts 1,013 KiB (34), images 846 KiB (13) and fonts 204 KiB (3). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
2 images far larger than shown
54 KiB2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example bannerusmed1c.png at 489 px wide, shown at 113 px. Resized copies would save about 54 KiB.
1 image below the first screen load straight away
1 image further down the page (24 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 0.6 g of CO₂ per visit
0.63 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.63 g of CO₂e: 75.6 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
1 checks passed
Images use modern formats
Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.
Accessibility
Required ARIA attributes must be provided (4 elements)
Required ARIA attributes must be provided: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated critical by axe-core.
13 text elements with low contrast
13 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
Links look like plain text
4 links inside paragraphs rely on colour alone to stand out.
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes (1 element)
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
Links must have discernible text (1 element)
Links must have discernible text: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (11 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 11 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h5), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.
Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (11 elements).
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 30 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
41 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: 41 passed and 7 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
No H1 headline
There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.
Meta description is long (240 characters)
Your meta description is 240 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
136 internal links, 14 external
The homepage links to 136 pages on usmed.com and 14 external pages.
6 checks passed
Title: 51 characters
Your title is a healthy 51 characters: “Diabetes Supplies Online - Order Today From US MED!”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.usmed.com/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: BreadcrumbList, ImageObject, 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.usmed.com/sitemap_index.xml.
AI search readiness
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.usmed.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.
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 (881 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
1 linked page hidden from search
https://www.usmed.com/new-patients/plans-we-service is marked noindex but linked from your homepage. If it is meant to be found, remove the noindex.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 47 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
6 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.
Titles are unique
Every page we checked has its own title.
Every page has an H1
Each page we checked has a main headline.
Every page has a title
All 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
15 small tap targets
15 of 32 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
3 JavaScript errors while loading
3 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Access to font at 'https://usmed.com/MyriadPro-Regular.woff' from origin 'https://www.usmed.com' has been blocked by CO…”.
1 checks passed
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
Thin social proof
Social proof on the homepage: 1 customer or partner logo. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.
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 739 words of copy
The homepage carries about 739 words of visible text.
4 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Get Started Today” and “Call Us Today 1-877-840-8218”.
13 calls to action
The homepage has 13 calls to action, for example “Call Us Today 1-877-840-8218”, “Contact Us” and “Call Us Today1-877-840-8218”.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Direct contact links
Visitors can reach you directly: 6 phone links and 0 email links.
Privacy and tracking
1 tracker load before any consent
1Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Tag Manager (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (Osano) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
2 cookies set on arrival
2Opening the homepage sets 2 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
13 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 13 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: Osano
A consent management tool (Osano) 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 usmed.com, 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
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 30 issues on usmed.com, including 15 speed issues, 2 SEO issues and 1 conversion gap. 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.