Free tool · Restaurant-tuned mobile audit · 30 seconds
How is your
Empareja con papeleo
How is your
restaurant website
actually doing?
Última revisión:
Hojas del operador que usan esta herramienta — imprimibles, llenables, exportan a CSV.
Forma parte de Salud del Escaparate — el puntaje compuesto que junta esta señal con cinco más en una sola tarjeta.
Drop your URL below and I'll run a real mobile audit in about thirty seconds — performance, SEO, accessibility, and the specific checks that matter for a restaurant. The full report renders on this page — no sign-up, no email, no tracking. (An optional form at the bottom emails you a PDF copy if you want one.)
Powered by Google's PageSpeed Insights API plus our own restaurant-specific scanner — ordering platforms, reservation widgets, maps, click-to-call, and mobile menu readability. Works on any publicly accessible URL (no staging environments or login walls).
Ejecutando tu auditoría…
Normalmente tarda de 15 a 40 segundos.
Deep scan continues after the report (1–2 min): security headers, site age, real-user data, Google reviews, email-deliverability.
- 1 Submitting your site for the speed test
- 2 Mobile speed test (Google PageSpeed)
- 3 Reading your menu, hours, ordering, and Google profile
- 4 Writing your report
No pudimos auditar esa URL.
Check the address and try again. The site needs to be publicly reachable — if it's behind a login or a local network, the audit can't see it.
—
/ 100
Restaurant fundamentals
—
Restaurant-specific checks Lighthouse misses
Speed on a phone
—
Qué tan rápido carga en móvil
Findable on Google
—
Whether Google can find you
Readable for everyone
—
Usable for every visitor
Modern & secure
—
Modern, secure web standards
Qué significa esto
—
3 arreglos principales
Sorted by estimated revenue at risk. Pick two — that's your weekend.
Knock these two out this weekend. Your checkmarks are saved on this device — come back Sunday night, re-run the audit, and you'll see exactly which numbers moved.
Your top 3 fixes all need a web person — there isn't a self-fix in the list this weekend. If you don't have someone, email don@muntin.digital and we'll route it.
Your action plan
Turn this audit into a plan you can work through
Your highest-leverage gaps, split across three horizons. Check each off as you tackle it — your progress is saved on this device and survives re-audits.
How much of your revenue stays with you?
—
/ 100
Every gap below forces customers through a commission-taking path instead of your own margin-preserving one. Aggregators typically take 15–30% per order; your net margin is 3–5%. Closing these leaks keeps the money with the kitchen.
Where orders are leaking:
No leaks detected — your site is set up to keep the margin in-house on every order.
Want to run the actual math on your own numbers? Margin Math covers the unit-economics decisions (DoorDash / price-raise / prime-cost / break-even). The Menu Engineering Matrix takes the next step — paste your menu items, prices, and units sold to find which dishes are pulling weight. The Menu Copy Inspector closes the loop — once you know which items to fix, the Inspector teaches you how the language is dragging the sale. And Open Hours is the 15-minute fix-up for the most thankless drift on your site — getting your hours right everywhere from Google to your front door. All four run in your browser.
What's actually dragging your score down
Every finding below comes straight from Google Lighthouse. They're grouped by category and sorted by estimated impact — fix the top items first.
¿Qué significan estos números, en realidad?
Rendimiento (0–100)
Qué tan rápido tus páginas cargan y se vuelven usables en un teléfono. Esta es la métrica que más les cuesta dinero a los restaurantes en silencio — la propia investigación de Google encontró que el 53% de los visitantes móviles se van de una página que tarda más de tres segundos en cargar. Una puntuación más alta significa que más personas se quedan lo suficiente para ver tu menú.
Bien: 90+ · Necesita trabajo: 50–89 · Reprobado: <50
Con base en: Cómo califica Lighthouse el rendimiento · La regla de los 3 segundos en móvil
Accesibilidad (0–100)
Si las personas con discapacidades visuales, diferencias motrices o lectores de pantalla pueden usar tu sitio de verdad. La mitad de esto es un requisito legal en muchos estados. La otra mitad es buena educación — alrededor de uno de cada cinco de tus clientes se beneficia directamente de un sitio accesible, y todos se benefician indirectamente (un mejor contraste de texto también hace que tu sitio sea más fácil de leer al sol).
Meta: 100. Cualquier valor menor significa que personas reales están quedando fuera.
Bases modernas y seguras (0–100)
Si tu sitio está construido sobre bases modernas y seguras — HTTPS, sin librerías vulnerables, sin funciones de navegador obsoletas. Un sitio bien hecho debería sacar 100 aquí por defecto. Una puntuación bajo 90 normalmente apunta a una cosa concreta que vale la pena arreglar, como un encabezado de seguridad faltante o un plugin antiguo.
Meta: 100.
SEO (0–100)
Los fundamentos técnicos de SEO — una etiqueta de título funcional, una meta descripción, una URL rastreable, un viewport apto para móvil, datos estructurados. Esta puntuación mide si Google puede posicionar tu sitio. No mide si sí posicionas para palabras específicas — esa es una pregunta a más largo plazo sobre contenido y enlaces entrantes.
Meta: 100. Cualquier valor menor deja señales de posicionamiento sobre la mesa.
Listo para restaurantes (0–100)
Nuestra propia rúbrica, específica para sitios de restaurantes independientes. Cubre nueve verificaciones que importan para convertir a un visitante móvil en una mesa reservada: un viewport móvil que funcione, tamaño de área tocable, contraste de texto, tamaños de fuente legibles, un teléfono tocable, un mapa embebido o enlace a direcciones, pedidos en línea o reservas (una plataforma conocida como Toast/OpenTable o un equivalente propio), un menú HTML (no un PDF o imagen) y marcado schema.org de Restaurant para la búsqueda local. Cada verificación pesa según su impacto en conversión — pasar gana peso completo, fallar gana cero. Lo que honestamente no pudimos confirmar queda fuera de ambos lados del promedio, así que "desconocido" nunca te penaliza. Los sitios que no son de restaurante muestran "N/D" aquí y esta categoría no cuenta para su puntuación general.
Métricas Web Esenciales
Cinco mediciones específicas de tiempos e interactividad. Tres de ellas (LCP, CLS, INP) son las Core Web Vitals actuales que Google usa para el posicionamiento de búsqueda móvil. Cada tarjeta muestra o bien datos de usuarios reales (la mediana de 28 días de experiencias reales que Google recopila desde Chrome) o una estimación de laboratorio (una ejecución móvil simulada) — los datos reales se prefieren cuando están disponibles, ya que reflejan el sitio que tus clientes experimentan de verdad. Los sitios nuevos o de poco tráfico normalmente solo tienen datos de laboratorio hasta acumular suficientes visitas.
- LCP — Largest Contentful Paint. Cuánto tarda en aparecer lo más grande visible de la página (normalmente una imagen principal o un encabezado). Bien: menos de 2.5s · Lento: más de 4s.
- CLS — Cumulative Layout Shift. Cuánto se mueve la página mientras carga. Los diseños que se mueven son la razón por la que a veces tocas "Reservar" y das sin querer en un anuncio porque el anuncio cargó un segundo tarde y empujó todo hacia abajo. Bien: menos de 0.1 · Lento: más de 0.25.
- INP — Interaction to Next Paint. Cuánto tarda la página en responder a un toque o clic — la tercera Core Web Vital, que sustituye a FID en 2024. Solo de campo: requiere suficientes visitas reales para reportarse. Bien: menos de 200ms · Lento: más de 500ms.
- TBT — Total Blocking Time. La aproximación de laboratorio para INP. Cuánto tiempo la página queda congelada mientras JavaScript se ejecuta durante la carga simulada. Útil cuando CrUX aún no ha recogido INP. Bien: menos de 200ms · Lento: más de 600ms.
- FCP — First Contentful Paint. Cuánto tarda en renderizarse el primerísimo pixel. Frecuentemente antes que LCP — esto es "la página está haciendo algo" en lugar de "la página es usable." Bien: menos de 1.8s · Lento: más de 3s.
Con base en: Cómo califica Lighthouse el rendimiento
Time to see the page
—
LCP · Largest Contentful Paint
Good under 2.5s · Slow over 4s
How much the page jumps
—
CLS · Cumulative Layout Shift
Good under 0.10 · Slow over 0.25
How fast it reacts to taps
—
INP · Interaction to Next Paint
Good under 200ms · Slow over 500ms
How long it’s frozen at start
—
TBT · Total Blocking Time
Good under 200ms · Slow over 600ms
Time to first pixel
—
FCP · First Contentful Paint
Good under 1.8s · Slow over 3s
What we can verify about this restaurant
Every sentence links to the verified signal it came from. Hover any citation to see the source.
Google reviews snapshot
What real visitors actually experience
Page load, response time, and layout stability — measured from real Chrome visitors over the last 25 weeks. We only show this when Google has enough samples to publish a real trend, so a brand-new or low-traffic site may not have data here yet.
Will your reservation confirmations land in spam?
Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo silently route booking confirmations and newsletters to spam unless your domain proves it can send mail. The three rows below are the proofs they look for.
We didn't classify this as a restaurant site
The four Lighthouse categories above (Performance, Accessibility, Best Practices, SEO) still apply — they're universal. We just didn't find the signals we look for to confirm a restaurant: a known ordering or reservation platform (Toast, OpenTable, Resy…), Restaurant schema markup, or clear restaurant language on the page.
If this is a restaurant and we got it wrong, tell us and we'll run the restaurant-specific checks on it.
We detected:
Auto-detected from schema markup, ordering/reservation platform, and page content. If we got it wrong, pick the right one — the checks below will update live.
Or:
Verified by Google
Google-published hours
Your name, address, and phone don't line up across sources
Google ranks local businesses higher when their Business Profile, website schema, and on-page text all match. Every mismatch below is a citation inconsistency search engines can see — pick the canonical value and unify.
How your site looks when shared on social
How well can Google read your menu, hours, and address?
Restaurant-priority checks
—
Also scanned:
¿Cómo te comparas?
Add up to three competitor restaurants and we'll audit each one side-by-side. Lets you see exactly where you're winning and where they're beating you.
Auditing competitor 1 of 3…
Each competitor takes 15–40 seconds. We run them one at a time so Google doesn't rate-limit us.
| Metric |
|---|
Something went wrong.
Envíame el PDF por correo.
Drop your email and I'll send the full printable PDF right away, with a short note on what jumped out at me. If something in the audit warrants a longer look, I may follow up personally. No drip, no newsletter.
Tu correo se queda conmigo. Sin lista, sin goteo de marketing.
Sent — the PDF is on its way to your inbox. Check your spam folder if you don't see it in a minute or two.
Remind me to re-audit in 30 days
Audits are snapshots. A friendly reminder in 30 days helps you see which fixes actually moved the score. One email, nothing else.
Your email lives only on the scheduled message. We don't store it on our end — no list, no drip, no follow-up.
Reminder scheduled — you'll hear from us in 30 days.
Show this score on your own site
Paste this snippet into your site footer. The badge refreshes to match whatever audit you run next — no manual updating.
How we calculate these numbers
The overall score
The overall score is a weighted average of five pillars. Performance is weighted 2× the others because a slow mobile site is materially worse for a restaurant than an imperfect SEO score — 53% of mobile visitors bounce from pages that take more than 3s to load. The Restaurant Readiness pillar is only included when we have enough confirmed checks to trust it; otherwise the score falls back to a simple 4-pillar average so one detected platform plus eight unverified checks doesn't inflate the overall number.
How we detect your restaurant subtype
Ten subtypes are recognized: fine-dining, casual-dining, fast-casual, cafe, bakery, bar-pub, pizzeria, food-truck, ghost-kitchen, and catering-only. Detection combines schema.org @type hints, the presence of subtype-specific platforms (Slice for pizzerias, Resy for fine-dining, etc.), and keyword patterns in the page text. Each signal contributes to a score; the highest-scoring subtype wins. Confidence is reported in the subtype card so you can override it if we got it wrong.
Check weights
Each of the 20+ restaurant-priority checks carries a weight from 0 (not applicable to this subtype) to 2.0 (critical). Viewport is 2.0 across every subtype because a missing viewport breaks every phone visitor's experience. Conversions (online ordering or reservations) is 1.5 for most subtypes but 2.0 for fine-dining (reservations) and 2.0 for fast-casual (ordering). Age-gate is 0 for every restaurant subtype — bars and restaurants don't legally need them in most jurisdictions, unlike alcohol retailers.
"Unverified" checks (where we honestly couldn't tell) count at HALF weight against the denominator, zero credit toward the numerator. This prevents a site we couldn't fully scan from inflating its score past a clean-scanning site with the same pass count. The penalty is disclosed on the score ring as "N unverified checks."
The "typical sites score" benchmark
Per-subtype benchmark medians are currently operator estimates from manual review of roughly 100 restaurant sites in each subtype. They're provisional — the refresh pipeline that replaces each subtype with a real sample size (drawn from live audits this tool runs) is future work. The benchmark chip's ⓘ tooltip carries the provenance on every render. Numbers are anchors for expectation-setting, not statistical claims.
The revenue-at-risk chip
Every actionable finding carries an "Est. $X–Y/yr at risk" chip. The range is the product of three inputs:
(1) a per-check revenue-at-risk coefficient based on published funnel-dropoff research; (2) your restaurant's estimated annual revenue, which starts from a subtype-aware default (fine-dining ~$2M, cafe ~$860k, food-truck ~$230k) and is automatically adjusted when Google Places tells us something more: priceLevel scales the per-ticket average (0.55× for $, 2.4× for $$$$), and userRatingCount scales daily covers logarithmically (clamped to 0.40×–2.50× so viral outliers don't project chain volume); (3) a confidence-widening layer that stretches the range when any of the Places signals aren't available, so an audit with thin data produces an explicitly wider chip instead of a falsely precise one.
Nothing in this chain asks you to type numbers. Every adjustment reads from signals the audit already fetches during the fast scan.
What "confidence-widened" means
When Google Places didn't find your listing, or didn't publish a price level, or hasn't accumulated at least 50 reviews, the revenue chip's low and high values are stretched to reflect the genuine uncertainty. A well-resolved audit might show Est. $12k–18k/yr at risk; a nothing-resolved audit of the same check shows Est. $5k–37k/yr at risk. The range width itself is the honesty layer — we'd rather show you a wide span we can defend than a tight one we can't.
What this audit does NOT do
It runs on one Lighthouse pass (simulated phone, default throttling) plus a follow-up crawl of up to eight internal pages. It does not test ordering flow end-to-end, place a real reservation, verify your DoorDash profile, or measure real-user traffic beyond what Google's CrUX report publishes. It does not scrape Yelp or TripAdvisor (their terms forbid it). It does not claim your revenue-at-risk numbers are precise — they're order-of-magnitude estimates, always shown as ranges with "Est." up front.
Found an error in a weight, a benchmark, or the revenue math? Tell us — the whole tool is open and the explanation above is linked from every audit so the methodology travels with the score.
Why this tool exists.
Every check this tool runs maps to a specific concept in the Library. Two starting points — one definition, one playbook.
Glossary
Métricas Web Esenciales
CWV
Google's three performance scores for a real page load on a phone — one for loading speed (LCP), one for layout stability (CLS), and one for…
Read the definition GlossaryLighthouse
Google's audit engine
The open-source auditing tool Google ships inside Chrome and inside PageSpeed Insights. It simulates a mobile page load and scores your site…
Read the definition GlossaryMayor elemento renderizado
LCP
How long it takes for the biggest visible chunk of your homepage — usually the hero image or the headline — to finish drawing on a phone. Un…
Read the definition GlossaryCambio de diseño acumulativo
CLS
A score that measures how much your page jumps around as it loads — when a banner slides in, an image arrives late, or a late-loading font n…
Read the definition ArticleHow to Tell If a Restaurant Tool Is Safe
A 5-test framework + 4-tier data model + a worked example. Verifiable in your own browser, under a minute per test.
Read the playbook
Want the real fix?
I build restaurant websites
I build restaurant websites
that ace this audit.
If the audit found more red than you're comfortable with, let's talk. Twenty minutes on Zoom, I'll walk through your results live, tell you what I'd do in what order, and give you a realistic budget and timeline. No pitch, no pressure.