Website review, no card needed
whiteandwilliams.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 5 November 202620 issues · 76 checks
This review found 20 issues worth fixing on whiteandwilliams.com, 4 of them high impact, across 76 checks. The most urgent: positive tabindex. 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
88BClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.1 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 972 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 941 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 833 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 776 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 840 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 838 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 911 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 889 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 885 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 935 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 701 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 712 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 711 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 693 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 961 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.0 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 951 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 941 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 907 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 840 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 851 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 856 ms |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| May 16, 2026 | 74 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 79 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 84 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 73 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 72 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 74 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 73 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 71 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 70 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 69 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 62 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 63 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 80 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 81 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 79 ms |
| Oct 10, 2026 | 75 ms |
| Oct 17, 2026 | 77 ms |
| Oct 24, 2026 | 72 ms |
| Oct 31, 2026 | 72 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
0.4 s
0.8 s
1.1 s
1.5 s
1.9 s
2.3 s
2.6 s
3.0 s
Speed
Mobile performance score: 89
89/100Your mobile performance score is 89. Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Reduce unused JavaScript
690 ms · 118 KiBAbout 118 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 690 ms faster on a phone.
Render-blocking requests
350 ms1 file blocks the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining it could save about 350 ms.
2 third-party services on the page
2 third-party services load with your homepage (Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics), adding 183 KiB and 227 ms of main-thread time.
Reduce unused CSS
150 ms · 20 KiBAbout 20 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.
3 long tasks on the main thread
3 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 135 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
Improve image delivery
28 KiB2 images could be 28 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.
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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 0.7 s
A phone's processor spends 0.7 s on main-thread work while loading, 295 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 2 ms
2 msYour server sent the HTML in 2 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
Largest Contentful Paint: 3.6 s
3.6 sYour largest element takes 3.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image.
7 images without width and height
7 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 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 74 ms to 72 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
12 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: 0.8 s
0.8 sReal visitors wait 0.8 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user INP: 75 ms
75 msReal visitors wait 75 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
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: 0.8 s
0.8 sReal visitors see the first content after 0.8 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 493 ms
493 msReal visitors wait 493 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Largest content (LCP) got 21% faster for real visitors
-21%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-31, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.1 s to 0.9 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
Time to Interactive: 3.7 s
3.7 sThe page is fully interactive after 3.7 s.
Total Blocking Time: 127 ms
127 msScripts block the page for only 127 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0.012
0.012The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0.012, good is under 0.1).
First Contentful Paint: 0.9 s
0.9 sThe first text or image appears after 0.9 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.
Speed Index: 1.8 s
1.8 sVisually, the page fills in at 1.8 s (Speed Index), inside the 3.4 s “good” threshold.
Images and page weight
1 image below the first screen load straight away
1 image further down the page (28 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 0.1 g of CO₂ per visit
0.14 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.14 g of CO₂e: 16.4 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.
3 checks passed
Page weight: 494 KiB in 22 requests
494 KiBYour homepage downloads 494 KiB in 22 requests on a phone: scripts 256 KiB (2), images 118 KiB (11) and fonts 84 KiB (4). That is a lean page.
Images use modern formats
Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.
Images are sized for phones
No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.
Accessibility
Positive tabindex
2 elements have a tabindex above 0, which scrambles the keyboard order.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (14 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 14 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)
Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
2 links without text
2 visible links have no text or label, so screen readers cannot say where they go.
Headings skip levels
Headings skip levels (h2 → h4), 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. (1 element).
2 checks passed
Every image has alt text
All 11 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.
45 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 50 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 45 passed and 5 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.
Title is short (22 characters)
Your title is only 22 characters: “White and Williams LLP”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
Meta description is long (343 characters)
Your meta description is 343 characters; Google truncates after about 160, so the end of your pitch is cut.
Open Graph partly set
Open Graph is missing og:title, so shared links fall back to guesses.
No X (Twitter) card tag
No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.
84 internal links, 4 external
The homepage links to 84 pages on whiteandwilliams.com and 4 external pages.
4 checks passed
Canonical URL set
The canonical URL is https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/.
Structured data in place
Structured data found: Organization.
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.whiteandwilliams.com/sitemap.xml.
AI search readiness
Organization data is thin (3 of 6 facts)
Your Organization JSON-LD is missing logo, description and contact details. These are the facts AI assistants use to describe a business and to tell it apart from others with a similar name.
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.whiteandwilliams.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 (1,129 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.
Other pages
4 pages share 2 titles
/ and https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/resources-perspectives all use the title “White and Williams LLP”, and 1 other title repeat too. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.
13 pages without a meta description
https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/people, https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/people-directory, https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/people-title, https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/services, https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/experience and https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/resources and 7 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.
3 pages without an H1
https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/people, https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/services and https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/resources-perspectives have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.
15 internal pages checked
We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 53 found) and read each the way a search engine does.
4 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.
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 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Tap targets are thumb-sized
18 of 22 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.
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 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.
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 347 words of copy
The homepage carries about 347 words of visible text.
3 checks passed
3 calls to action
The homepage has 3 calls to action, for example “Contact” and “Subscribe”.
2 short forms
2 short forms (1 field at most) are right on the homepage.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Analytics.
Privacy and tracking
2 trackers load before any consent
2Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager (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.
4 cookies set on arrival
4Opening the homepage sets 4 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.
2 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 2 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 whiteandwilliams.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
- Hosting
- Akamai Cloud
Company
- Founded
- 1899
Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info
Go beyond the website
What your $25 Growth Playbook adds
This review found 20 issues on whiteandwilliams.com, including 5 speed issues, 3 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
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.