Delekus: a phone-and-desktop teardown

TL;DRWhat jumped out

Of everything we found on this scan, this is the one to start with: A floating widget is covering a clickable element. 12 clickable elements are sitting underneath a fixed overlay (div#cm_disclaimer-header over button "Previous slide"), so a visitor who tries to tap them hits the widget on top instead. The element is there and looks fine in a preview, it just can't be reached. Move the floating widget to a clear corner, lower its z-index, or add spacing so it never overlaps your links and buttons.

Below: what's already working, every finding ranked by impact and tagged with the screen it affects, the speed numbers on phone and desktop, and a checklist of what to fix first.

00What's already working

Start here so the problems below are in context. These held up across the test loads:

• Speed is good. The main content paints in about 0.5s in our test loads, inside Google's 2.5s "good" threshold. Real networks are slower, but the page itself is not heavy.
• Layout stays put as it loads. Real visitors see only 0.01 of layout shift (good is under 0.10), so the page is not jumping under their finger.
• Layout holds on phone and desktop. Nothing spilled past the edge at either 390px (phone) or 1366px (desktop), so the structure is responsive.

This is one of several oil refiner sites we tore down the same way. The same friction repeats on Valero, and we pulled the cross-site pattern together in the oil-refiner web benchmark.

01Findings, ranked by what hurts conversion most

Accessibility findings are automated checks against Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 and 2.2. They flag potential barriers and legal risk, not a certification or a determination of compliance with the ADA, Section 508, or EN 301 549. Automated testing catches only a subset of issues; a full conformance review needs manual and assistive-technology testing by a qualified reviewer.

"How we know": unlabeled = a deterministic fact, identical on every load (e.g. element sizes). Most findings are this kind, so we only mark the exceptions: median across loads = a noisy lab metric, reported as a median. real-user field data = Google CrUX, actual Chrome visitors.

02Performance: phone, desktop, and real visitors

Google Lighthouse (lab): Performance 54 mobile / 34 desktop, SEO 83, Accessibility 94, Best Practices 54.

Lab numbers are from a headless mobile browser on an unthrottled connection: treat them as a floor, not a typical experience.

03Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobile

20 of 61 tappable items on this page come in below 44×44 pixels, the size Apple and Google both recommend for reliable tapping on a phone. The same ones came up small on every one of the 4 test loads, so this is the page itself, not a fluke.

The buttons measuring below the minimum on this scan:

• button 30x20 "close disclaimer"
• button 30x20 (no visible label)
• a 93x20 (no visible label)
• a 93x20 (no visible label)
• button 8x8 "Go to slide 1"
• button 8x8 "Go to slide 2"
• button 8x8 "Go to slide 3"
• a 88x18 "READ MORE REFINING"

The fix is CSS-only on most sites: add padding around the icon (don't just change the icon size) so the actual tap area is at least 44×44 pixels. No redesign, no new assets.

04Technical SEO & structured data

05The fix checklist

Everything to fix, priority first, each tagged with the screen it affects and a rough effort. Work top to bottom.

1. A floating widget is covering a clickable elementBothCSS only
2. Page contains "Lorem ipsum" placeholder textBothVaries
3. Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobileMobileCSS only
4. Main content is slow to appear on phonesBothSmall
5. Google is writing your search snippet for youBoth1 line
6. Page is heavy and slow on mobile dataBothSmall
7. JavaScript crashed while the page was loadingBothDev afternoon
8. The page has no main headingBothVaries
9. Images have no width or height set (layout is stable for now)BothCSS only
10. No canonical tag, so duplicate URLs split the page's rankingBoth1 line
11. Security headers are missing or weakBothVaries
12. Links to this page will look bare when sharedBoth1 line
13. No structured data for rich search resultsBothVaries
14. The page loads from a lot of third-party servicesBothDev afternoon
15. No third-party analytics tag detectedBothDev afternoon
16. No email capture or newsletter detectedBothVaries
17. No visible contact details (email or phone)BothVaries
18. Unused JavaScript is being downloadedBothVaries
19. Unused CSS is being downloadedBothVaries
20. Some links do not describe where they goBothVaries
21. Headings skip levelsBothVaries

Effort is a rough read from the outside: "CSS only" means no new assets or backend work, "1 line" means a single tag, "Dev afternoon" means a developer needs to touch tracking or scripts.

06What this report cannot tell you

Everything above is from the outside, looking at the page on a simulated phone and desktop. The questions that actually decide revenue need real visitors. Install the Harvv pixel (one script tag, 16 KB, zero personal data, no engineering project) and within about 72 hours you'd know which buttons real customers tapped and missed, how often Google Analytics is missing visits, and exactly where mobile shoppers stalled and left. This report shows you where to look. The pixel shows you how often it happens, and to whom.

07How we did this, and what it can't prove

• 4 mobile + 2 desktop loads of one URL from headless Chrome (iPhone viewport at 390px, desktop at 1366px), July 17, 2026. Enough loads to separate real defects from random noise, not a full-site crawl.
• Lab numbers, not real-user numbers, except the CrUX rows, which are real Chrome users. Real devices on real networks run slower.
• Friction is inferred, not counted. We can prove a button is small. We can't, from the outside, count how often it causes a missed tap. That requires the pixel on a live page.

Prepared by Harvv (harvv.com), a behavioral UX analytics platform. Last updated July 17, 2026.