Web
Audits

Audit results for coffeewatch.org

Results and Sub-scores

ECOS Score and Categories
URL
Date
ScoresTotal ECOS Score v154
Efficient54
Clean0
Open83
Safe78
ECOS Score Display54ECOS Score
Score results compared to audits in the ECOS database.
coffeewatch.org54
Average (arithmetic mean)67
Statistical distributionp9089
p7579
Median62
p2555
p1051
DatasetLast update2/24/26, 6:25 AM
Number of measurement points (n)441
Statistical distribution of audits5467

How is the score composed?

Visualization of the score composition and weighting of sub-indicators (relative values in brackets)

Composition of the ECOS ScoreECOS Score Display54Scores25%ECOS Score Display54Efficiency25%ECOS Score Display0Clean25%ECOS Score Display83Open25%ECOS Score Display78Safe40% (10%)ECOS Score Display42Performance30% (7.5%)ECOS Score Display100Best Practices30% (7.5%)ECOS Score Display23Network50% (12.5%)ECOS Score Display84Accessible50% (12.5%)ECOS Score Display82SEO50% (12.5%)ECOS Score Display100Trust50% (12.5%)ECOS Score Display55Secure50% (3.75%)ECOS Score Display45Requests50% (3.75%)ECOS Score Display0Data Weight50% (6.25%)ECOS Score Display100Webrisk50% (6.25%)ECOS Score Display100IP Check

Detailed tabular representation of the score calculation and source references for the sub-indicators.

IndexValueWeightingSub-indicators
Scores
54100%
IndexValueWeightingSub-indicators
Efficiency
5425%
IndexValueWeightingData Sources
Performance
4240% (10%)
Best Practices
10030% (7.5%)
Network
2330% (7.5%)
IndexValueWeightingData Sources
Requests
4550% (3.75%)
  • Relative score: Number of HTTP requests (compressed) is put in relation to data from all websites
  • PageSpeed API (Google) - Number of HTTP requests lighthouseResult.audits.network-requests.details.items[].transferSize
  • httparchive.org - Relative frequencies of websites by number of HTTP requests data (2024)
  • Web Audits/GitHub - create_subscore_requests
Data Weight
050% (3.75%)
  • Relative score: Size of transferred data (compressed) is put in relation to data from all websites
  • PageSpeed API (Google) - Transferred data by type lighthouseResult.audits.network-requests.details.items[].resourceSize
  • httparchive.org - Relative frequencies of websites by transferred data (2024)
  • Web Audits/GitHub - create_subscore_weight
Clean
025%
Open
8325%
IndexValueWeightingData Sources
Accessible
8450% (12.5%)
SEO
8250% (12.5%)
Safe
7825%
IndexValueWeightingSub-indicators
Trust
10050% (12.5%)
IndexValueWeightingData Sources
Webrisk
10050% (6.25%)
IP Check
10050% (6.25%)
  • AbuseIPDB - Checking if IP address is listed with malware or harmful practices
Secure
5550% (12.5%)

API Sources & Independent Tests

This audit relies heavily on the following APIs. You can run these tests separately here:

Rating Categories

Efficient: Performance & Resources

The Efficient category evaluates how fast and resource-friendly a website works. A high score signals short loading times and a clean technical foundation.

The sub-score is primarily based on Lighthouse metrics for Performance and Best Practices. Additionally, relative benchmarking is performed: transferred data volume and the number of server requests are put in relation to current average values from the HTTP Archive database. This accurately measures how efficiently the site performs compared to global web standards.

Efficiency here not only reduces CPU load but directly improves the user experience.

ECOS Score Display54Efficiency
Score results compared to audits in the ECOS database.
coffeewatch.org54
Average (arithmetic mean)69
Statistical distributionp9096
p7585
Median69
p2554
p1045
DatasetLast update2/24/26, 6:25 AM
Number of measurement points (n)441
Statistical distribution of audits5469

Performance

The Performance score evaluates the speed at which content is loaded and becomes interactive. It analyzes metrics such as the Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) and responsiveness. High performance saves time and conserves the hardware resources of users.

ECOS Score Display42Performance

Best Practices

This indicator checks compliance with modern web standards. This includes security aspects, correct image formats, and the avoidance of outdated technologies. Clean best practices form the foundation for a long-lasting, efficient, and maintainable web architecture.

ECOS Score Display100Best Practices

Data Transfer

Here, the data load is evaluated in comparison to the global average (HTTP Archive). The total size of transferred bytes and the number of server requests are measured. Less data traffic directly means less energy consumption and faster loading processes worldwide.

ECOS Score Display23Network

Number of Requests

Every requested file creates communication overhead between the browser and the server. We put the total number of requests in relation to the median of the HTTP Archive database. Fewer requests mean less overhead and a significantly faster page build, especially with unstable connections.

ECOS Score Display45Requests

Number of Requests
coffeewatch.org
79
Statistical distributionp90177
p75114
Median70
p2540
p1021
DataTime2024
Device TypeMobile
Homepage (root page)
Sources
Benchmark vs. HTTP Archive79
HTTP Requests by resource type and origin
HTTP RequestsShare
Data Type
Images3848.1%
Script1721.52%
Style67.59%
Fonts22.53%
Document56.33%
Other1113.92%
Media00%
Total79100%
Origin
Third Party3746.84%
Self4253.16%
Number of requests by file typeImages (48.1%)Script (21.52%)Style (7.59%)Fonts (2.53%)Document (6.33%)Other (13.92%)Media (0%)Third Party (46.84%)Self (53.16%)
Transferred Data Volume

The total size of the website in kilobytes is measured. This value is compared with average values from millions of websites (HTTP Archive). A low data load saves bandwidth for the user and reduces the energy required for global data transfer.

ECOS Score Display0Data Weight

Data Transfer (in kb)
coffeewatch.org
10977
Statistical distributionp909603.52
p754702.96
Median2357.43
p251156.58
p10487.09
DataTime2024-06-01
Device TypeMobile
Homepage (root page)
Sources
Benchmark vs. HTTP Archive10977
Data volume type and origin
Data volume (kb)Share
Data Type
Images247350.15%
Script229146.46%
Style821.66%
Fonts511.03%
Document180.37%
Other160.32%
Media00%
Total4931100%
Origin
Third Party236748%
Self256452%
Data volume by file typeImages (50.15%)Script (46.46%)Style (1.66%)Fonts (1.03%)Document (0.37%)Other (0.32%)Media (0%)Third Party (48%)Self (52%)

Clean: Ecological Footprint

The Clean area measures the ecological sustainability of digital operations. The focus is on the CO2 balance resulting from hosting and data transfer.

The calculation is performed using the co2.js library and considers two essential factors: the estimated energy consumption per page view and the share of renewable energy in the power grid of the respective server location (Grid Intensity).

A high score shows that the website is operated with minimal CO2 emissions and relies on environmentally friendly infrastructure. This makes the invisible environmental impacts of digital products transparent and evaluable.

ECOS Score Display0Clean
Score results compared to audits in the ECOS database.
coffeewatch.org0
Average (arithmetic mean)33
Statistical distributionp9099
p7573
Median2
p250
p100
DatasetLast update2/24/26, 6:25 AM
Number of measurement points (n)441
Statistical distribution of audits033

CO2 Emissions

Greencheck API Results
Sub-areaIndexValue
CO₂How high are the CO₂ emissions of coffeewatch.org?1118.282g CO₂ per 1,000 page views.
CO2.js (Green Web Foundation) rating of coffeewatch.orgF
Energy sourceDoes the hosting provider of coffeewatch.org use renewable energy?No
Documents

Open: Accessibility and Discoverability

The Open category evaluates how accessible and discoverable a website is for both humans and machines. Transparent structures and open standards are the decisive criteria here.

The score consists of two central Lighthouse audits: Accessibility and SEO. A high value guarantees that content is fully usable for people with disabilities and that technical hurdles do not hinder visibility in search engines.

Openness thus promotes an inclusive internet and ensures that information remains equally accessible to every user group.

ECOS Score Display83Open
Score results compared to audits in the ECOS database.
coffeewatch.org83
Average (arithmetic mean)91
Statistical distributionp90100
p7597
Median92
p2587
p1080
DatasetLast update2/24/26, 6:25 AM
Number of measurement points (n)441
Statistical distribution of audits8391

Accessibility

This score indicates how usable a website is for people with disabilities. Aspects such as contrast ratios, screen reader compatibility, and logical structures are evaluated. An inclusive web is an open web that excludes no one through technical barriers.

ECOS Score Display84Accessible

SEO

The SEO score checks technical discoverability by search engines. It ensures that content can be correctly indexed and that metadata is present. Good SEO makes information openly accessible and visible to the relevant target group on the net.

ECOS Score Display82SEO

Safe

The Safe index evaluates the technical integrity and reputation of a website. It combines infrastructure analysis from AbuseIPDB and Google Web Risk to detect malware or blacklisting with an in-depth audit of HTTP security headers via the MDN HTTP Observatory. This multi-layered approach ensures that both the server's reputation and the implementation of modern encryption and protection standards are verified.

ECOS Score Display78Safe
Score results compared to audits in the ECOS database.
coffeewatch.org78
Average (arithmetic mean)74
Statistical distributionp9090
p7585
Median73
p2563
p1063
DatasetLast update2/24/26, 6:25 AM
Number of measurement points (n)441
Statistical distribution of audits7874

Trust & Reputation

The integrity of the domain is checked against global databases such as Google Webrisk and AbuseIPDB. This ensures that the site is not known for malware, phishing, or fraudulent activities. This forms the essential basis for digital trust.

ECOS Score Display100Trust

Google Web Risk

This indicator matches the URL against Google's lists of dangerous web resources. It checks whether the site is known for phishing, social engineering, or the distribution of malware. A negative result guarantees that visitors are protected from malicious content.

ECOS Score Display100Webrisk

AbuseIPDB Check

Here, the reputation of the server IP is checked. AbuseIPDB collects reports on malicious activities such as spam or DDoS attacks. A clean score confirms that the website's hosting environment is not associated with criminal activities.

ECOS Score Display100IP Check

Mozilla HTTP Observatory

The MDN HTTP Observatory is an analysis tool by Mozilla designed to evaluate a website's security header configuration. It helps developers correctly implement modern security standards like CSP, HSTS, and CORS to mitigate risks such as cross-site scripting and clickjacking. (HTTP Observatory Scoring Methodology)

ECOS Score Display55Secure

HTTP Observatory Reults
HTTP Observatory Score55/100
HTTP Observatory GradeC
TestsPassed7
Failed2
HTTP Observatory Tests
TestPassedModifierResultDescription
Content Security Policy-25csp-not-implementedContent Security Policy (CSP) header not implemented
Strict Transport Security-20hsts-not-implementedHTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) header not implemented
Content Type Protection0x-content-type-options-nosniffX-Content-Type-Options header set to 'nosniff'
Clickjacking Protection0x-frame-options-implementedX-Frame-Options header properly implemented
Referrer Policy0referrer-policy-safeReferrer-Policy implemented with safe value
Cookie Security0cookies-not-foundNo cookies detected
Cross-Origin Sharing0cross-origin-resource-sharing-not-implementedContent is not visible via CORS
HTTPS Redirection0redirection-all-httpsSite uses HTTPS
Opener Policy (COOP)5coop-implementedCross-Origin-Opener-Policy implemented (bonus)

CrUX Reports: Real User Experience

The CrUX Reports (Chrome User Experience Report) provide valuable insights into the actual performance of a website from the perspective of real users worldwide.

Unlike synthetic lab tests, this data reflects real conditions such as different hardware performance, fluctuating network speeds, and individual browser configurations. Since these metrics are a key ranking factor for Google, they show immediately how the website performs in the everyday life of visitors.

The analysis is carried out on two levels to evaluate both the specific subpage and the quality of the entire domain (Origin).

CrUX Origin

The Origin score aggregates user experience data across the entire domain. This provides a comprehensive overall picture of the technical quality of the website infrastructure. It helps to assess whether performance problems are systemic in nature or only affect individual pages of a website.

CrUX results
IndicatorScore (CrUX)Score (linear)ValueDistribution (CrUX API)
OverallSLOW46
Cumulative Layout Shift (value)average6816CrUX Performance Distribution0.000.100.200.300.400.500.60Percentile0102030ms
Experimental Time to First Byteslow291978CrUX Performance Distribution0.000.100.200.300.400.50Percentile05001000150020002500ms
First Contentful Paint (in ms)average472684CrUX Performance Distribution0.000.100.200.300.400.50Percentile01000200030004000ms
Interaction to Next Paintfast9899CrUX Performance Distribution0.00.20.40.60.81.0Percentile0200400600ms
Largest Contentful Paint (in ms)average343967CrUX Performance Distribution0.000.100.200.300.400.50Percentile0100020003000400050006000ms

Past Audit Data

Summary
Average54
Number of Audits1

Q & A: Interpretation of Results

To what extent does coffeewatch.org follow technical best practices regarding sustainability and security, what is the total ECOS score, and how does the result compare with other sites?
With a score of 54/100, the rating is in the weakest quarter of URLs recorded in the database.
How efficiently is coffeewatch.org optimized regarding data transfer and loading speed, how does the site perform in the ECOS audit in this regard, and how does it stand compared to the competition?
The ECOS score is 54/100; the result is in the lower half of the examined websites.
What about technical security and privacy protection on coffeewatch.org, how high is the ECOS Safe score, and how secure is the site in direct comparison with other sites?
The result is above the median of the comparison values. The score is 78/100.
To what extent does coffeewatch.org rely on open standards and digital accessibility, how many points does the site achieve in the ECOS Open rating, and how inclusive is it compared to other websites?
With a score of 83/100, the rating is in the weakest quarter of URLs recorded in the database.
How sustainable is the ecological footprint of coffeewatch.org through optimized resource use, how high is the ECOS Clean score, and how does the result compare to other examined sites?
The ECOS score is 0/100; the result is in the lower half of the examined websites.

Raw Data Downloads for coffeewatch.org

Download raw audit data and ECOS statistics as JSON.

Data can also be accessed programmatically via the REST API. Details can be found in the documentation.

  • Basic Audit Scores: Compact JSON response with the 5 main scores.
  • Full Audit Detail: Detailed analysis results including all technical individual checks.
  • Audit History: Temporal development of scores across all previous measurements.
  • ECOS Benchmark Statistics: Descriptive statistics and percentile distribution of the entire ECOS database.

License: CC-BY-SA 4.0.