Every web design and development audit we run starts in the same unglamorous place: we check whether the site can be measured at all. Not the design, not the load time, not the copy. Analytics first. The reason is simple. If the numbers are wrong, every other finding in the report is a guess dressed up as a recommendation, and the redesign that follows will be justified by data nobody can defend. We have opened accounts where half the traffic was the client’s own staff, where the checkout tracked twice, and where a tag had been silently broken since a theme update nine months earlier. In each case the team had been making decisions from those numbers the whole time.
The order of the audit is deliberate and we do not shuffle it to suit whoever is loudest in the kickoff call. Measurement, then speed, then crawlability, then the conversion path, then accessibility, then content. Each stage produces findings that change how you read the next one. A page that looks like a conversion disaster often turns out to be a tracking artefact. A page that looks slow often turns out to be slow only for a subset of devices that happen to be most of your buyers. Working in this order stops you from fixing the symptom of a problem you have not found yet.
Stage one: is the measurement telling the truth
We check that analytics fires once per page, that internal traffic is filtered, that key events correspond to real business outcomes, and that values match what the back office recorded. Then the quieter faults: sessions splitting across subdomains, referral traffic from a payment provider credited with every sale, consent handling that blocks collection for a large slice of visitors. Fixing these usually changes the picture enough that existing priorities need rewriting.
We also look at what is not measured. Forms that submit without an event. Phone taps on mobile. Chat conversations that convert offline. A site can be performing well in ways that never reach a report, and teams rarely defend budgets for things they cannot see.
Speed, and which parts of it matter
Speed work is where audits go to waste. It is easy to produce a long list of improvements that move a score without moving a customer. We measure on real device profiles and the connection quality the audience actually uses, then focus on what the visitor perceives: how long until content is readable, how long until it responds, and whether things jump around while loading. Layout that shifts under a finger is a lost tap on a buy button.
The recurring culprits are unsurprising. Oversized images served at desktop dimensions to phones, third party scripts nobody can account for, fonts that block rendering, and a plugin stack that grew by accretion. In a web design and development audit, removing things is usually cheaper and more effective than optimising them.
Crawlability and conversion path in a web design and development audit
Crawlability is about whether search engines can reach, read and understand the pages that matter commercially. We check for pages blocked by accident, duplicate versions competing with each other, canonical signals that contradict internal linking, and sitemap coverage that has quietly stopped including a whole content type. That last one is common and produces no error anywhere. The sitemap generates cleanly. It is just missing a section.
The conversion path stage is a walkthrough, not a spreadsheet. We complete the main journey on a phone, as a first time visitor, with the patience a stranger would have. Where did we hesitate, where did the promise change, where did a form ask for something it did not need. Then we compare that against the analytics to see whether the drop off is where the friction is.
- Keyboard navigation through the whole primary journey, including any overlay or cookie banner.
- Colour contrast on body text, buttons and form labels, in both light and dark presentation.
- Form fields with real labels rather than placeholder text that vanishes on focus.
- Headings used as structure rather than as a way to change font size.
- Images carrying alt text that describes the content, not the file name.
Accessibility findings are not a separate moral exercise. Most of them are usability findings that happen to also be legal exposure. A form that is hard for a screen reader is usually hard for a distracted person on a train. We report them alongside everything else rather than in a segregated appendix that gets deferred forever.
Content comes last because it is judged against everything above it. Thin pages that exist only to hold a keyword, service pages describing process instead of outcome, duplicate descriptions across a product range. We also flag what is missing: the question a buyer asks in the sales call that appears nowhere on the site.
Which findings usually pay
Commercially, the order of return is fairly consistent across the sites we see. Broken or misleading measurement first, because it changes every decision afterwards and costs nothing but attention to fix. Then the conversion path, because small friction on a page that already receives qualified traffic converts into revenue immediately. Then crawlability faults that are keeping earning pages out of the index. Speed and accessibility matter and should be scheduled, but they rarely produce the step change that a fixed checkout or a recovered category section does. A useful web design and development audit says this plainly and puts the expensive, slow, satisfying work where it belongs, which is after the cheap work that pays this quarter.
Keep reading: Web Design and Development · Web Design