Website review, no card needed

zipwater.com logo

zipwater.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 1 November 202622 issues · 73 checks

This review found 22 issues worth fixing on zipwater.com, 7 of them high impact, across 73 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
2.9 s1.7 sMay 9Oct 242.7 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
May 9, 20261.9 s
May 16, 20261.9 s
May 23, 20261.9 s
May 30, 20262.0 s
Jun 6, 20262.1 s
Jun 13, 20262.3 s
Jun 20, 20262.4 s
Jun 27, 20262.5 s
Jul 4, 20262.5 s
Jul 11, 20262.5 s
Jul 18, 20262.6 s
Jul 25, 20262.7 s
Aug 1, 20262.8 s
Aug 8, 20262.7 s
Aug 15, 20262.6 s
Aug 22, 20262.6 s
Aug 29, 20262.6 s
Sep 5, 20262.6 s
Sep 12, 20262.6 s
Sep 19, 20262.6 s
Sep 26, 20262.7 s
Oct 3, 20262.7 s
Oct 10, 20262.7 s
Oct 17, 20262.7 s
Oct 24, 20262.7 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
121 ms111 msMay 9Oct 24120 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
May 9, 2026112 ms
May 16, 2026113 ms
May 23, 2026113 ms
May 30, 2026113 ms
Jun 6, 2026113 ms
Jun 13, 2026113 ms
Jun 20, 2026117 ms
Jun 27, 2026120 ms
Jul 4, 2026120 ms
Jul 11, 2026118 ms
Jul 18, 2026113 ms
Jul 25, 2026113 ms
Aug 1, 2026112 ms
Aug 8, 2026112 ms
Aug 15, 2026112 ms
Aug 22, 2026112 ms
Aug 29, 2026113 ms
Sep 5, 2026113 ms
Sep 12, 2026114 ms
Sep 19, 2026115 ms
Sep 26, 2026117 ms
Oct 3, 2026120 ms
Oct 10, 2026120 ms
Oct 17, 2026120 ms
Oct 24, 2026120 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 zipwater.com (phone) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. zipwater.com at 0.5 s0.5 s
  2. zipwater.com at 0.9 s0.9 s
  3. zipwater.com at 1.4 s1.4 s
  4. zipwater.com at 1.8 s1.8 s
  5. zipwater.com at 2.3 s2.3 s
  6. zipwater.com at 2.8 s2.8 s
  7. zipwater.com at 3.2 s3.2 s
  8. zipwater.com at 3.7 s3.7 s

Speed

1 to fix94
  • Render-blocking requests

    1.1 s

    3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.1 s.

  • Improve image delivery

    225 KiB

    5 images could be 225 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    91 KiB

    26 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (91 KiB).

  • Reduce unused CSS

    66 KiB

    About 66 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.

  • 1 third-party service on the page

    1 third-party service load with your homepage (Google Fonts), adding 247 KiB and 0 ms of main-thread time.

  • 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: 94

    94/100

    Your mobile performance score is 94. That is in Google's “good” band (90 and up).

  • Main-thread work: 0.2 s

    A phone's processor spends 0.2 s on main-thread work while loading, 9 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 163 ms

    163 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 163 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

7 to fix67
  • 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 TTFB: 1.8 s

    1.8 s

    Real visitors wait 1.8 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Real-user LCP: 3.1 s

    3.1 s

    Real visitors wait 3.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Largest content (LCP) got 43% slower for real visitors

    +43%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.9 s to 2.7 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Real-user FCP: 2.3 s

    2.3 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 2.3 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Speed Index: 5.7 s

    5.7 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 5.7 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • 25 images without width and height

    25 images have no width and height attributes, so the layout jumps as each one loads.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    +7%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 112 ms to 120 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

7 checks passed
  • Real-user INP: 106 ms

    106 ms

    Real visitors wait 106 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.00

    0.00

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.00 (75th percentile). 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.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 1.7 s

    1.7 s

    Your largest element renders in 1.7 s on a phone, inside Google's 2.5 s “good” threshold. The largest element is the text “Makers of the award-winning Zip HydroTap. Experience the co…”.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0

    0

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).

  • Total Blocking Time: 0 ms

    0 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

  • Time to Interactive: 1.7 s

    1.7 s

    The page is fully interactive after 1.7 s.

Images and page weight

2 to fix86
  • An image on the first screen is lazy-loaded

    zip-usa-flag-big.jpg 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).

  • 2 images far larger than shown

    103 KiB

    2 images are downloaded at several times the size a phone draws them, for example Service_Tech_Changing_Filter.jpg at 1,505 px wide, shown at 342 px. Resized copies would save about 103 KiB.

  • 4 images in older formats

    4 images (335 KiB) are 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.

  • About 0.3 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.33 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.33 g of CO₂e: 39.2 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

1 checks passed
  • Page weight: 1.2 MB in 32 requests

    1.2 MB

    Your homepage downloads 1.2 MB in 32 requests on a phone: images 841 KiB (24), fonts 245 KiB (3) and stylesheets 73 KiB (3). That is a lean page.

Accessibility

3 to fixGoogle 8595
  • 1 button without a name

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

  • 2 text elements with low contrast

    2 text elements don't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.

  • 3 links without text

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

  • Headings skip levels

    Headings skip levels (h1 → h4 and h3 → h6), 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 36 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 43 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 47 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 43 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

2 to fixGoogle 8587
  • No meta description

    No meta description, so Google writes its own snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image (also missing: og:description), so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.

  • 115 internal links, 22 external

    The homepage links to 115 pages on zipwater.com and 22 external pages.

6 checks passed
  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Welcome to Zip Water”.

  • Title: 51 characters

    Your title is a healthy 51 characters: “Boiling, Sparkling & Chilled Water Taps | Zip Water”.

  • Canonical URL set

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

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: Corporation.

  • 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.zipwater.com/sitemap.xml.

AI search readiness

100
4 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.

  • Organization data: 5 of 6 facts

    Your Organization JSON-LD gives name, url, logo, sameAs (social profiles) and contact details; description would complete it.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (552 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

  • llms.txt published

    The site publishes https://www.zipwater.com/llms.txt (2 KiB, 11 links), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.

Other pages

3 to fix85
  • 15 pages without a meta description

    https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap, https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap/filtration, https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap/how-to-choose, https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap-selector, https://www.zipwater.com/service/store-finder and https://www.zipwater.com/case-studies and 9 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • 1 link to non-canonical URLs

    Your homepage links to 1 page by a URL that isn't its canonical one, for example https://www.zipwater.com/shop/hydrotap, whose canonical is https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap. Linking straight to the canonical URL saves crawlers a detour and keeps ranking signals on one address.

  • 3 pages without an H1

    https://www.zipwater.com/hydrotap-selector, https://www.zipwater.com/service/store-finder and https://www.zipwater.com/case-studies 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 52 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.

  • Titles are unique

    Every page we checked has its own title.

  • 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

1 to fixGoogle 9693
  • 5 JavaScript errors while loading

    5 errors were logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “Loading the script 'https://www.zipwater.com/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js' violates the following Content Se…”.

2 checks passed
  • Tap targets are thumb-sized

    54 of 54 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

2 to fix70
  • 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 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 448 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 448 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: “Book a Service”.

  • 15 calls to action

    The homepage has 15 calls to action, for example “Where to buy”, “Book a service” and “Contact us”.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.

Privacy and tracking

1 to fix
  • 5 trackers load before any consent

    5

    Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Google Ads, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Meta Pixel and Microsoft Clarity (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.

  • 23 cookies set on arrival

    23

    Opening the homepage sets 23 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.

  • 26 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 26 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 zipwater.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
jQuery
Analytics
Google Tag Manager
Hosting
Azure

Upkeep, stack, hiring and company data from programmable.info

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 22 issues on zipwater.com, including 8 speed issues, 2 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

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