Example
E-commerce store
Scenario: catalog + checkout. Heavy images, third-party scripts, mobile LCP.
Performance · SEO · Security headers
See report structureSee what goes
into the report.
Analysis scope, module results and the most important issues in one view. Explore a sample result before creating your own report.
A demonstration, not a client result. Reports do not replace expert review or a formal compliance document.
The report shows the technical audit result across five quality areas.
The team can review the overall score, module results and priority issues. Decisions about changes still need the site’s context.
Example scenarios
Three contexts, the same report structure.
Explicitly labeled examples (not audits of named brands). Presentation date and focus areas, so you can see how the report reads across site types.
Example
SaaS landing
Scenario: product landing + docs. CTA contrast, heading structure, TLS.
Accessibility · SEO · Security
See report structure Example
Content site / blog
Scenario: article archive. Page weight, indexing, CO₂e estimate (SWDM).
SEO · Ecology · Performance
See report structureExample scenario
A complete sample result
Not UI alone, but site type, scope, sources, the 43 → 7 → 3 funnel, one priority with evidence and a limits section.
Data sources
- Lab: Lighthouse / Playwright (desktop + mobile)
- Field: CrUX when available; N/A in this scenario (insufficient sample)
- Crawl of public paths within plan limits
- Ecology: CO₂e estimate (SWDM v4), not energy metering
43 findings
7 issues
3 for now
Scenario score 68/100 (previous 61)
Hero image blocks mobile LCP
Evidence
Lab mobile LCP 4.1 s · img.hero element · 820 KB JPEG transfer without srcset/AVIF.
Why now
Hits the first catalog view and increases transfer. Highest impact among open issues in this scope.
Recommended fix
AVIF/WebP, responsive variants, LCP preload and dimension limits in the template.
Confidence / limit
High lab detection confidence · verify on production after shipping.
Re-test
After shipping: same URL scope · lab mobile LCP + hero weight · compare to 06 Jul 2026 baseline.
What this report does not cover
- Not an expert audit, pentest, or WCAG / ESG certificate.
- Logged-in areas and private APIs were out of scope.
- CrUX field: N/A, insufficient sample; lab scores do not replace real-user vitals.
- Priorities are diagnostic; business decisions and effort estimates stay with the team.
Public, versioned methodology. See how each score and priority is calculated.
Example scenario, not an audit of a live production domain. A client PDF needs an account and share permission.
From modules to one report.
Four steps from Insight results to a report ready for review, export and client sharing.
Summary Scan
Overall score, issue count and latest audit scope in one place.
Modules
Score breakdown across Performance, SEO, Accessibility, Security and other modules.
Recommendations
Top findings and priorities: an audit summary for team review.
Site summary
Overall score, issue count and last scan date: a quick site health picture without opening each module separately.
Report · summary
overall
priority
in report
Report · module aggregate
Module scores
Performance, SEO, Accessibility, Security and Ecology: each module with its score and trend. You see which area pulls the average down.
Report top issues
6Top issues
Top findings sorted by weight and source module, with no promise of an exhaustive list of every audit signal.
65 before
73 after
Export and share
Export to PDF, CSV or XLSX, plus a public read-only link with an expiry date. For client or team review, without sharing your account.
Summary
One score for the whole site.
Aggregate of Insight module results: overall grade, issue count and analysis scope. It does not promise a full business assessment or Google rankings.
- Overall score
- Issue count
- Scan date
Modules
Score in every area.
Breakdown by Insight module: Performance, SEO, Accessibility, Security and Ecology. Each score comes from technical audit, not manual expert judgment.
- 5 modules
- Score per area
- Trend vs previous
Top issues
What needs attention first.
List of top findings with source module, priority and URL context. It is an audit summary, not an exhaustive inventory of every signal.
- Priority · module
- URL context
- Audit summary
For client
A report you can send to a client.
Export to PDF (CSV and XLSX from the Growth plan), or a public read-only link with frozen report content and an expiry date. You can revoke the link at any time, and on Scale you can issue reports under your own brand.
- PDF, CSV, XLSX
- Public read-only link
- White-label on Scale
CometWeb Insight combines findings from the selected modules into one report. Start with scope and date, review the main issues with their page URLs and priorities, then add the agreed repair plan. Share a PDF or report link with the client. Export formats and branding depend on the plan.
No. The report summarizes Insight automated audit results. It is a technical view, not a compliance certificate, pentest or legal audit.
No. The report is based on automatically detectable signals. Business context, manual testing and strategic decisions remain with the team or an expert.
Yes. Export the report to PDF, and from the Growth plan also to CSV and XLSX, or send clients a public read-only link with a 1–90 day expiry. The link shows a frozen snapshot of the report and can be revoked at any time.
The report summarizes results and context for review and sharing. Tasks turn findings into a work queue with priority and status. Both complement each other but do not replace PM tools.
Not fully. The report reflects Insight technical audit results at a point in time, with no promise of impact on conversion, revenue or search rankings.
One scan. One list.
One less meeting about what to fix first.
Full module audit in Insight. Free plan, no card.
No credit card Report with date and sources Free account in the app