What your site is actually doing.
One page: what is working, what is costing you visitors, and what to fix next. A phone-and-desktop teardown of the live site: 4 phone loads + 2 desktop loads. No login, no insider access, no Harvv pixel needed. The full evidence is at the bottom.
Working
What's already working. These held up across every load.
Speed is good.
The page is about 0.1 MB across 22 requests. That keeps it quick on mobile data and cheap to load repeatedly.
No JavaScript errors on load.
Lighthouse scores SEO 100/100. The fundamentals Google looks for are present.
Nothing spilled past the edge at either 390px (phone) or 1366px (desktop), so the structure is responsive.
Costing you
Ranked by what hurts conversion most. Full evidence below.
Add quotations so AI engines cite this page
Some text is low-contrast and hard to read
No email capture or newsletter detected
No advertising pixel detected
Some text is too small to read on phones
One focused change, on the pages people actually land on: Some text is too small to read on phones. We re-measure the same samples after.
01Findings, ranked by what hurts conversion most
| Severity | Finding | How we know |
|---|---|---|
| Low | No email capture or newsletter detectedBothConversion No email input field was found in the page, and no email-marketing tag (Klaviyo, Mailchimp, Substack, ConvertKit, Beehiiv, MailerLite, ActiveCampaign, Omnisend, Brevo, Drip or Buttondown) was detected. A form that loads after JavaScript runs, or one behind a popup or a separate page, will not be visible to this check. If capturing visitors is relevant to this site, an email signup builds an owned audience you keep regardless of ad costs. Not every site needs one. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| High | Add quotations so AI engines cite this pageBothAI SearchSEO Generative engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews) lift sourced, attributed quotes almost verbatim, and quotations are the single strongest citation lever (studies measure roughly +41%). Add 1-2 attributed expert quotes or blockquotes to the pages below. (Found across a sample of 8 pages from your sitemap, a partial crawl rather than your full site.) paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | No advertising pixel detectedBothTracking Analytics is present but no Meta/Google/TikTok ad pixel was found. If you run paid ads, conversion tracking should be installed before the next campaign so the platforms can optimize toward buyers, not clicks. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| High | Some text is low-contrast and hard to readBothAccessibility (WCAG) Text that does not stand out enough from its background is hard to read for many visitors, and fails accessibility guidelines Google checks. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | Some text is too small to read on phonesMobileAccessibility (WCAG)Conversion 9 chunks of text come in under 12 pixels on this page. Most visitors don't zoom, they just skim past anything that small. Bumping the smallest body text to 14 pixels makes the page read without effort. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | median across loads |
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.
Structural and AI-search checks crawl up to 8 pages from your sitemap (a sample, not your full site). "Broken" means a link returned 404, 410, or 5xx, or did not respond; access-controlled pages (401, 403) are not counted.
02Performance: phone, desktop, and real visitors
| Metric | Mobile | Desktop | Read |
|---|---|---|---|
| TTFB (lab median) | 13 ms | 13 ms | Lab |
| FCP (lab median) | 186 ms | 222 ms | Lab |
| LCP (lab median) | 186 ms | 222 ms | Good |
| Page weight (median) | 0.1 MB | 0.1 MB | OK |
Google Lighthouse (lab): Performance 98 mobile / 100 desktop, SEO 100, Accessibility 97, Best Practices 100.
Lab numbers are from a headless mobile browser on an unthrottled connection: treat them as a floor, not a typical experience. Add a Google API key to light up real-user field data (CrUX) and Lighthouse scores.
03Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobile
4 of 40 tappable items on this page come in below the platform minimums for reliable tapping on a phone (Apple recommends 44pt, Android 48dp; WCAG 2.5.8 sets 24px as the hard accessibility floor). 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:
- select 179x19 "# all-clients # conversion-d"
- a 82x15 "Privacy policy"
- a 37x15 "Terms"
- button 340x21 "Customize"
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
| Check | Result |
|---|---|
| Title | Not a dashboard. An analyst. | Harvv behavioral analytics (57 chars) |
| Meta description | 198 chars |
| H1 | 1 on page |
| Canonical | Present |
| Structured data (JSON-LD) | SoftwareApplication, FAQPage |
| Open Graph | Title + image |
05The fix checklist
Everything to fix, priority first, each tagged with the screen it affects and a rough effort. Work top to bottom.
- No email capture or newsletter detectedBothVaries
- Add quotations so AI engines cite this pageBothVaries
- No advertising pixel detectedBothDev afternoon
- Some text is low-contrast and hard to readBothVaries
- Some text is too small to read on phonesMobileCSS only
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.
Drop the Harvv pixel on harvv.com and we turn this one-off scan into ongoing measured behavior: which taps miss, where sessions stall, and the real drop rates. Free to start, no card needed.
Add the pixel free07How 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), September 4, 2026. Enough loads to separate real defects from random noise, not a full-site crawl.
- Lab numbers, not real-user numbers (no field data was available for this run). 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.
About Harvv, the source of this teardown
Harvv is a behavioral UX analytics platform (harvv.com). A lightweight JavaScript pixel captures how real visitors behave on a site (dead clicks, rage clicks, scroll depth, Core Web Vitals, JavaScript errors, and 50+ other signals) and the engine turns them into prioritized, plain-English findings. This teardown is the outside-in version of that: the same detectors run against a public page, with no pixel installed.
How to read it. Every finding here is a reproducible, automated measurement, not an opinion: element sizes, contrast ratios, load metrics, and structured-data checks that anyone can re-run against the same URL. The method is stated in full above. Automated testing catches a subset of issues, so this is a starting point, not a certification.
Full disclosure. Harvv makes the pixel that would measure the friction these findings imply, so we have a commercial interest. That is exactly why the findings are kept to things a reader can verify independently, and why nothing here is inflated: an unreproducible claim would undermine the tool it is meant to demonstrate.
Prepared by Harvv (harvv.com), a behavioral UX analytics platform. Last updated September 4, 2026.