Website review, no card needed
vicaima.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 3 November 202627 issues · 77 checks
This review found 27 issues worth fixing on vicaima.com, 7 of them high impact, across 77 checks. The most urgent: fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors. 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
84BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.8 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.6 s |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 1.7 s |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 1.8 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 104 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 102 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 97 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 104 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 106 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 103 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 107 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 107 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 109 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 102 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 105 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 109 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 116 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 119 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 120 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 123 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 123 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 123 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 130 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
0.7 s
1.5 s
2.2 s
3.0 s
3.7 s
4.5 s
5.2 s
6.0 s
Speed
Reduce unused JavaScript
150 ms · 375 KiBAbout 375 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
Google Tag Manager adds 229 ms
229 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 229 ms of main-thread work and 529 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.
4 third-party services on the page
4 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Facebook and Google/Doubleclick Ads and others), adding 756 KiB and 379 ms of main-thread time.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
198 KiB2 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (198 KiB).
2 long tasks on the main thread
2 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 67 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Reduce unused CSS
66 KiBAbout 66 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.
Legacy JavaScript
13 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 13 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.
3 checks passed
Mobile performance score: 91
91/100Your mobile performance score is 91. That is in Google's “good” band (90 and up).
Main-thread work: 1.2 s
A phone's processor spends 1.2 s on main-thread work while loading, 400 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 212 ms
212 msYour server sent the HTML in 212 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.
Real-user LCP: 2.6 s
2.6 sReal visitors wait 2.6 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Tap response (INP) got 23% slower for real visitors
+23%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 104 ms to 130 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Real-user FCP: 2.0 s
2.0 sReal visitors see the first content after 2.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 1.4 s
1.4 sReal visitors wait 1.4 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Time to Interactive: 6.6 s
6.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 6.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 5.0 s
5.0 sVisually, the page fills in at 5.0 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 2.9 s
2.9 sYour largest element takes 2.9 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “This website, in addition to cookies necessary for its corr…”. Most of its time is element render delay (2.1 s).
1 image without width and height
1 image have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+8%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.6 s to 1.8 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
5 checks passed
Real-user INP: 161 ms
161 msReal visitors wait 161 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.04
0.04For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.04 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
First Contentful Paint: 1.5 s
1.5 sThe first text or image appears after 1.5 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.024
0.024The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.024, good is under 0.1).
Total Blocking Time: 20 ms
20 msScripts block the page for only 20 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Images and page weight
1 image over 500 KB
Catlogo-USACAN-POP-UP_3.gif weighs 1.5 MB. On a phone connection a single image that size takes seconds.
1 image in older formats
1 image (1.5 MB) is 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.
An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded
dekordor-sd-visual-sensations-mobile-16211921092026.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).
About 0.4 g of CO₂ per visit
0.39 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.39 g of CO₂e: 46.6 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: 1.4 MB in 30 requests
1.4 MBYour homepage downloads 1.4 MB in 30 requests on a phone: scripts 825 KiB (6), images 226 KiB (10) and fonts 213 KiB (6). That is a lean page.
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
28 text elements with low contrast
28 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
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 (34 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 34 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
2 form fields without a label
2 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h1 → h3), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 25 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
37 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 41 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 37 passed and 4 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
107 internal links, 14 external
The homepage links to 107 pages on vicaima.com and 14 external pages.
8 checks passed
Meta description: 150 characters
Your meta description is 150 characters: “Vicaima was founded in 1959 and is currently one of the leading European manufacturers of interior doors, technical doo…”.
One H1 headline
Your main headline reads: “Interior, fire, acoustic and security doors, wardrobes and panels”.
Title: 32 characters
Your title is a healthy 32 characters: “Vicaima | Internal Doors Company”.
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.vicaima.com/en.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: 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.vicaima.com/sitemap.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.vicaima.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.
Opted out of AI training for 1 crawler
robots.txt blocks ClaudeBot, which collect pages to train models. That's a legitimate choice and doesn't by itself stop the site appearing in AI answers, which the crawlers above handle.
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 (1,082 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
1 linked page hidden from search
https://www.vicaima.com/en/finishes is marked noindex but linked from your homepage. If it is meant to be found, remove the noindex.
1 page without an H1
https://www.vicaima.com/en/infinity has no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
1 page with very little text
https://www.vicaima.com/en/infinity has under 150 words in the HTML. Thin pages rarely rank; if the text loads with JavaScript, crawlers that don't run it see even less.
3 pages slow to respond
https://www.vicaima.com/en/sustainability, https://www.vicaima.com/en/products and https://www.vicaima.com/en/products/wardrobes took over 3 s to send their HTML from our server.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 44 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.
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 a title
All 15 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
13 small tap targets
13 of 34 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 “Unexpected identifier 'Promise'”.
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.
About 287 words of copy
The homepage carries about 287 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
2 short forms
2 short forms (1 field at most) are right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Analytics, Meta Pixel, Microsoft Clarity and Fathom.
Risk reducer mentioned
A guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card or similar) is mentioned on the page.
Privacy and tracking
1 cookie set on arrival
1Opening the homepage sets 1 cookie (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 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 vicaima.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Analytics
- Google Analytics | Microsoft Clarity | Fathom
- Hosting
- Almouroltec Almouroltec Servicos De Informatica E Internet Lda
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 27 issues on vicaima.com, including 11 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.