Website review, no card needed
weareflo.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 29 October 202635 issues · 73 checks
This review found 35 issues worth fixing on weareflo.com, 10 of them high impact, across 73 checks. The most urgent: improve image delivery. 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
74CClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideOne score from every part of this review. How it works
How it loaded on a phone
0.6 s
1.1 s
1.7 s
2.2 s
2.8 s
3.3 s
3.9 s
4.4 s
Speed
Improve image delivery
2.3 s · 376 KiB3 images could be 376 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.3 s faster on a phone.
Reduce unused JavaScript
2.1 s · 359 KiBAbout 359 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.1 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 51
51/100Your mobile performance score is 51. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Render-blocking requests
650 ms2 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 650 ms.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
350 ms · 128 KiB6 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (128 KiB).
Main-thread work: 3.5 s
A phone's processor spends 3.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.3 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.
Google Tag Manager adds 212 ms
212 msGoogle Tag Manager costs a phone 212 ms of main-thread work and 301 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.
5 third-party services on the page
5 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager, Hubspot and Plausible and others), adding 576 KiB and 327 ms of main-thread time.
15 long tasks on the main thread
15 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 231 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Legacy JavaScript
150 ms · 26 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 26 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need. Google estimates it would make the page about 150 ms faster on a phone.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 21 KiBAbout 21 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.
Font display
50 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 50 ms).
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: 81 ms
81 msYour server sent the HTML in 81 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
First Contentful Paint: 9.6 s
9.6 sThe first text or image appears after 9.6 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.
Largest Contentful Paint: 34.5 s
34.5 sYour largest element takes 34.5 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
Time to Interactive: 34.6 s
34.6 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 34.6 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Speed Index: 10.6 s
10.6 sVisually, the page fills in at 10.6 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Total Blocking Time: 264 ms
264 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 264 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
12 images without width and height
12 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.
Not enough real-visitor data yet
Chrome's UX Report (opens in a new tab) has too little real-visitor traffic for this site, so the figures here are lab measurements from Google's test phone on a throttled 4G connection.
1 checks passed
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
Page weight: 6.1 MB in 68 requests
6.1 MBYour homepage downloads 6.1 MB in 68 requests on a phone: other files 3.3 MB (16), images 1.0 MB (23) and scripts 952 KiB (21). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.
1 image far larger than shown
240 KiB1 image is downloaded at several times the size a phone draws it, for example blur-1.png at 2,017 px wide, shown at 390 px. Resized copies would save about 240 KiB.
1 image in older formats
1 image (361 KiB) 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.
2 images below the first screen load straight away
2 images further down the page (291 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 1.7 g of CO₂ per visit
1.73 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 1.73 g of CO₂e: 208.1 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
Accessibility
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes (5 elements)
Elements must only use permitted ARIA attributes: 5 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.
1 image without alt text
1 image has no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
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.
6 links without text
6 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Alternative text of images should not be repeated as text (10 elements)
Alternative text of images should not be repeated as text: 10 elements on the page fail this check, rated minor by axe-core.
1 checks passed
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. 2 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.
Title is short (14 characters)
Your title is only 14 characters: “Homepage — FLO”. 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 canonical URL
No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.
Meta description is long (200 characters)
Your meta description is 200 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
No XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at https://www.weareflo.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
5 links with vague text
5 links use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind them.
19 internal links, 11 external
The homepage links to 19 pages on weareflo.com and 11 external pages.
2 checks passed
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.
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.weareflo.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 (488 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
2 pages share a title
https://www.weareflo.com/customer-experience and https://www.weareflo.com/apac all use the title “FLO CX — FLO”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
2 pages share a meta description
https://www.weareflo.com/customer-experience and https://www.weareflo.com/apac use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
3 pages without an H1
https://www.weareflo.com/contact, https://www.weareflo.com/insights and https://www.weareflo.com/brand-experience have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
8 internal pages checked
We fetched 8 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
5 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 8 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 8 pages that loaded have a meta description.
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 8 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
6 JavaScript errors while loading
6 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Connecting to 'https://analytics.google.com/g/collect?v=2&tid=G-0L7KGGCB3B>m=45je6ar1h1v9181730548za20ozb9184261776zd…”.
Browser-reported issues
Chrome logged issues while loading the page (“Content security policy”).
Missing source maps
Large scripts ship without source maps.
2 checks passed
Tap targets are thumb-sized
14 of 17 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
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 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 520 words of copy
The homepage carries about 520 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
Clear next step on the first screen
On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Contact” and “Get in touch”.
4 calls to action
The homepage has 4 calls to action, for example “Contact” and “Get in touch”.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager and HubSpot.
Privacy and tracking
2 trackers load before any consent
2Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Tag Manager and HubSpot (measured from a US location before any click). No consent tool was detected. Visitors from the EU, UK and several US states must be asked first.
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.
16 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 16 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
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 weareflo.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.
Upkeep, stack and company
Stack
- Framework
- Next.js
- Analytics
- Google Tag Manager
- Hosting
- Vercel
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 35 issues on weareflo.com, including 13 speed issues, 7 SEO issues and 2 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.