Parpacific: a phone-and-desktop teardown
We loaded https://parpacific.com 4 times on a simulated iPhone and 2 more on a 1366px desktop, and wrote down what a real visitor would see on each. No login, no insider access, no Harvv pixel needed. Here is what repeated visits already show, sorted by how we know it.
TL;DRWhat jumped out
Of everything we found on this scan, this is the one to start with: Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobile. 17 of 34 tappable items on this page (50%) measure under 24 pixels on their shorter side, below the WCAG minimum, and well under the 44 pixels Apple and Google recommend for reliable tapping, and the same ones came up small on every test load. When visitors can't hit what they expect to, they get frustrated and many of them leave instead of trying again.
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 0.6s in our test loads, inside Google's 2.5s "good" threshold. Real networks are slower, but the page itself is not heavy.
- Light page weight. The page is about 1.1 MB across 110 requests. That keeps it quick on mobile data and cheap to load repeatedly.
- No JavaScript errors on load. Nothing threw a script error across the test loads, so buttons and tracking are not silently breaking mid-session.
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
| Severity | Finding | How we know |
|---|---|---|
| High | Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobileMobileAccessibility (WCAG)Conversion 17 of 34 tappable items on this page (50%) measure under 24 pixels on their shorter side, below the WCAG minimum, and well under the 44 pixels Apple and Google recommend for reliable tapping, and the same ones came up small on every test load. When visitors can't hit what they expect to, they get frustrated and many of them leave instead of trying again. The exact elements we found: paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| High | Google Analytics tracking brokenBoth The Google Analytics request failed to complete on every one of the 4 test loads. If real visitors hit the same failure, GA is missing those visits and the dashboard has no way to flag it. Conversion numbers, audience counts, and channel attribution are all undercounting. Worth checking the tag loading order and any consent banner that might be blocking the request. 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 | |
| High | Some links cannot be followed by GoogleBothSEO Links that are not real anchors with an href cannot be crawled, so the pages they point to may never get indexed. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| High | Broken internal linksBothSEOConversion 1 internal link target returned an error (404/410/5xx) or did not respond. Broken links waste crawl budget, frustrate visitors, and leak ranking signal. (Found across a sample of 8 pages from your sitemap, a partial crawl rather than your full site.) The exact examples we found:
paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Medium | Page overflows the desktop windowDesktop On a 1366px desktop window something still extends past the right edge and gets clipped or forces a horizontal scrollbar. That is almost always a fixed-width element or an image without a max-width, and it reads as broken on the device most buyers research from. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Medium | 13 interactive elements have no stable, accessible identityBothAccessibility (WCAG)Tracking These elements are clicked like buttons but expose no accessible name, or are a plain div/span used as a control with no role. Assistive tech announces only a role (or nothing), and analytics and heatmaps have no human-readable label or stable selector to bind the click to, so the click is both inaccessible and untrackable, and any redesign silently breaks click aggregation. Give each one a real <button>/<a>, an aria-label, and a stable id or data-attribute. The exact elements we found:
paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Medium | Expose a last-updated date (freshness)BothAI SearchSEO ChatGPT cites recently-updated pages roughly 76% of the time and passes over stale, undated ones. These pages expose no machine-readable dateModified. Refresh the content and add dateModified (Article schema / meta). (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 | Images have no width or height set (layout is stable for now)BothPerformanceSEO 5 of 9 images don't declare width and height. Your layout currently stays stable (measured Cumulative Layout Shift is 0, which is fine), most likely because space is reserved another way (CSS), so this is not causing visible jumps today. It is still worth setting explicit dimensions or a CSS aspect-ratio so a slow connection or a future style change cannot reintroduce shift. The exact images we found: paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | Search-result title is leaving room on the tableBothSEO Google gives you about 60 characters of headline space in search results. This page is using 18. Adding the value proposition or a relevant keyword gives someone one more reason to click. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | No structured data for rich search resultsBoth The page has no schema.org markup. Adding the right type (Product, Article, Organization, FAQ) lets Google show rich results like star ratings and prices, which lift click-through for free. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | The page loads from a lot of third-party servicesBoth Around 15 separate outside domains load on this page (analytics, ads, chat widgets, fonts). Each one is a connection that can be slow, fail, or change behavior outside your control. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | median across loads |
| Low | 3 generic CTA links/buttons ("Click here", "Learn more", "Submit")BothAccessibility (WCAG)Conversion Screen-reader users hear a list of "click here, click here, learn more" with no context. Sighted users learn nothing about where the link goes from the label alone. Rewrite each CTA to describe the destination ("See pricing", "Read the case study"). The exact elements we found: 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 | |
| Low | No email capture or newsletter detectedBothConversion No email-marketing tag (Klaviyo, Mailchimp, etc.) was found. 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 | |
| Low | Unused JavaScript is being downloadedBothPerformance Code that never runs on this page still costs download and parse time on every visit. Splitting or removing it speeds up load. Lighthouse measured: Est savings of 183 KiB. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | Unused CSS is being downloadedBothPerformance Style rules that this page never uses still block rendering while they download. Trimming them frees the paint path. Lighthouse measured: Est savings of 72 KiB. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | Sitemap URL redirectsBothSEO A URL listed in your sitemap redirects to a different URL. Sitemaps should list final destination URLs; redirected entries waste crawl budget and dilute ranking signals. (Found across a sample of 8 pages from your sitemap, a partial crawl rather than your full site.) The exact examples we found:
paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | No llms.txt fileBothSEO No /llms.txt. This emerging standard gives AI search engines a clean, structured map of your most important content, improving how they understand and cite your site. paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT | |
| Low | No Organization or WebSite schemaBothSEO No site-wide Organization or WebSite structured data found on any crawled page. This is the schema that tells Google and AI engines who you are (name, logo, social profiles) for the knowledge panel and brand recognition in AI answers. (Found across a sample of 8 pages from your sitemap, a partial crawl rather than your full site.) paste into Claude, Cursor, or ChatGPT |
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) | 332 ms | 311 ms | Lab |
| FCP (lab median) | 504 ms | 466 ms | Lab |
| LCP (lab median) | 624 ms | 508 ms | Good |
| Page weight (median) | 1.1 MB | 1.2 MB | OK |
Google Lighthouse (lab): Performance 63 (mobile), SEO 85, Accessibility 96, Best Practices 81.
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
17 of 34 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:
- a 1x1 "Skip to main content"
- a 316x19 "Learn more"
- a 316x19 "Learn more"
- a 316x19 "Learn more"
- a 64x18 "About Us"
- a 77x18 "Operations"
- a 92x18 "Sustainability"
- a 62x18 "Investors"
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 | Home | Par Pacific (18 chars) |
| Meta description | 141 chars |
| H1 | 1 on page |
| Canonical | Present |
| Structured data (JSON-LD) | None |
| 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.
- Tiny buttons are hard to tap on mobileMobileCSS only
- Google Analytics tracking brokenBothDev afternoon
- Some text is low-contrast and hard to readBothVaries
- Some links cannot be followed by GoogleBothVaries
- Broken internal linksBothVaries
- Page overflows the desktop windowDesktopCSS only
- 13 interactive elements have no stable, accessible identityBothDev afternoon
- Expose a last-updated date (freshness)BothVaries
- Images have no width or height set (layout is stable for now)BothCSS only
- Search-result title is leaving room on the tableBoth1 line
- No structured data for rich search resultsBothVaries
- The page loads from a lot of third-party servicesBothDev afternoon
- 3 generic CTA links/buttons ("Click here", "Learn more", "Submit")BothVaries
- No advertising pixel detectedBothDev afternoon
- No email capture or newsletter detectedBothVaries
- Unused JavaScript is being downloadedBothVaries
- Unused CSS is being downloadedBothVaries
- Sitemap URL redirectsBothVaries
- No llms.txt fileBothVaries
- No Organization or WebSite schemaBothVaries
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 parpacific.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), July 31, 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 July 31, 2026.