Website review, no card needed

verkerk.com logo

verkerk.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 3 November 202630 issues · 76 checks

This review found 30 issues worth fixing on verkerk.com, 9 of them high impact, across 76 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
1.7 s1.2 sMay 16Oct 311.6 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 16, 20261.2 s
May 23, 20261.2 s
May 30, 20261.2 s
Jun 6, 20261.3 s
Jun 13, 20261.4 s
Jun 20, 20261.4 s
Jun 27, 20261.5 s
Jul 4, 20261.4 s
Jul 11, 20261.4 s
Jul 18, 20261.5 s
Jul 25, 20261.4 s
Aug 1, 20261.5 s
Aug 8, 20261.6 s
Aug 15, 20261.6 s
Aug 22, 20261.5 s
Aug 29, 20261.6 s
Sep 5, 20261.5 s
Sep 12, 20261.3 s
Sep 19, 20261.4 s
Sep 26, 20261.4 s
Oct 3, 20261.4 s
Oct 10, 20261.6 s
Oct 17, 20261.5 s
Oct 24, 20261.6 s
Oct 31, 20261.6 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
80 ms61 msMay 16Oct 3167 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 16, 202667 ms
May 23, 202672 ms
May 30, 202671 ms
Jun 6, 202675 ms
Jun 13, 202678 ms
Jun 20, 202671 ms
Jun 27, 202673 ms
Jul 4, 202670 ms
Jul 11, 202669 ms
Jul 18, 202669 ms
Jul 25, 202670 ms
Aug 1, 202674 ms
Sep 12, 202663 ms
Sep 19, 202663 ms
Sep 26, 202663 ms
Oct 3, 202669 ms
Oct 10, 202671 ms
Oct 17, 202668 ms
Oct 24, 202667 ms
Oct 31, 202667 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 verkerk.com (phone) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. verkerk.com at 0.6 s0.6 s
  2. verkerk.com at 1.3 s1.3 s
  3. verkerk.com at 1.9 s1.9 s
  4. verkerk.com at 2.6 s2.6 s
  5. verkerk.com at 3.2 s3.2 s
  6. verkerk.com at 3.9 s3.9 s
  7. verkerk.com at 4.5 s4.5 s
  8. verkerk.com at 5.2 s5.2 s

Speed

8 to fix63
  • Render-blocking requests

    1.4 s

    7 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.4 s.

  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    1.1 s · 339 KiB

    About 339 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.1 s faster on a phone.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    150 ms · 1.5 MB

    11 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (1.5 MB).

  • Improve image delivery

    1.3 MB

    9 images could be 1.3 MB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

  • Mobile performance score: 63

    63/100

    Your mobile performance score is 63. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • Reduce unused CSS

    450 ms · 83 KiB

    About 83 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 450 ms faster on a phone.

  • Font display

    400 ms

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

  • 2,405 HTML elements

    The page has 2,405 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

  • 1 third-party service on the page

    1 third-party service load with your homepage (vinci-energies.net), adding 219 KiB and 169 ms of main-thread time.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    150 ms · 16 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 16 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.

  • 4 long tasks on the main thread

    4 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 159 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.

  • Minify JavaScript

    3 KiB

    3 KiB could be saved by minifying JavaScript.

2 checks passed
  • Main-thread work: 1.6 s

    A phone's processor spends 1.6 s on main-thread work while loading, 557 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 12 ms

    12 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 12 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

7 to fix50
  • 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: 9.9 s

    9.9 s

    Your largest element takes 9.9 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “nocookie”.

  • Time to Interactive: 9.9 s

    9.9 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 9.9 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Speed Index: 6.2 s

    6.2 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 6.2 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.19

    0.19

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.19 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Largest content (LCP) got 28% slower for real visitors

    +28%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.2 s to 1.6 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Total Blocking Time: 206 ms

    206 ms

    Scripts block taps and scrolling for 206 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    -4%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 67 ms to 67 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

4 checks passed
  • Real-user LCP: 1.6 s

    1.6 s

    Real visitors wait 1.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Real-user FCP: 0.7 s

    0.7 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 0.7 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.096

    0.096

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.096, good is under 0.1).

  • First Contentful Paint: 1.7 s

    1.7 s

    The first text or image appears after 1.7 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.

Images and page weight

1 to fix85
  • Page weight: 3.5 MB in 35 requests

    3.5 MB

    Your homepage downloads 3.5 MB in 35 requests on a phone: images 1.5 MB (10), scripts 950 KiB (10) and fonts 930 KiB (9). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

  • About 1.0 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.99 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.99 g of CO₂e: 118.8 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

3 to fixGoogle 8795
  • Images must have alternative text (3 elements)

    Images must have alternative text: 3 elements on the page fail this check, rated critical by axe-core.

  • 1 button without a name

    1 button has no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.

  • 5 links without text

    5 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.

  • Headings skip levels

    Headings skip levels (h2 → h5), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.

1 checks passed
  • 47 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 51 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 47 passed and 4 failed. 3 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

4 to fixGoogle 8584
  • Title is short (14 characters)

    Your title is only 14 characters: “Home - Verkerk”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.

  • Structured data has 1 problem

    Structured data found (BreadcrumbList, WebPage and WebSite) but with 1 problem, for example “BreadcrumbList: itemListElement is an empty list”.

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • 2 links crawlers can't follow

    2 links have no real href, so search engines can't follow them.

  • 228 internal links, 13 external

    The homepage links to 228 pages on verkerk.com and 13 external pages.

5 checks passed
  • Meta description: 141 characters

    Your meta description is 141 characters: “Verkerk realiseert slimme en duurzame gebouwgebonden installaties voor utiliteit, zorg, onderwijs en industrie. Samen b…”.

  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Hart voor mens en techniek”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://www.verkerk.com/.

  • 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.verkerk.com/sitemap_index.xml.

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.

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.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (1,687 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

  • llms.txt published

    The site publishes https://www.verkerk.com/llms.txt (1 KiB, 0 links, though it should open with a “# Title” line), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.

Other pages

1 to fix95
  • 3 pages without a meta description

    https://www.verkerk.com/contact, https://www.verkerk.com/over-verkerk/leverings-en-algemene-inkoopvoorwaarden and https://www.verkerk.com/markten/industrie 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 146 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.

  • 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 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.

Best practices

2 to fixGoogle 9687
  • 2 small tap targets

    2 of 8 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_HTTP2_PROTOCOL_ERROR”.

  • Missing source maps

    Large scripts ship without source maps.

1 checks passed
  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

3 to fix67
  • 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.

  • Thin social proof

    Social proof on the homepage: 1 trust badge. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.

  • 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 1,778 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 1,778 words of visible text.

3 checks passed
  • 4 calls to action

    The homepage has 4 calls to action, for example “Contact” and “Contact opnemen”.

  • 1 short form

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

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Analytics and Matomo.

Privacy and tracking

  • 6 cookies set on arrival

    6

    Opening 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.

  • 1 other company contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 1 host 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 verkerk.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 Analytics | Matomo
Hosting
Azure

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 verkerk.com, including 15 speed issues, 4 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