How company websites are doing in the Zlín Region
We measured hundreds of company websites in the region with one tool in one week. No names, no league table, and with a methodology you can recalculate. The numbers below come straight from the measurement, not from the text.
8 August 2026
What the measurement showed
Measured on mobile with Google PageSpeed Insights, plus our own reading of the page. Every site was measured on its final address after redirects.
The figures above recalculate for the selected sector
How the sites are distributed
A median is one number. This chart shows the point: the sites do not cluster around the average, they pile up at the bottom.
What the sites run on
Detected from what each page loads by itself.
- WordPress38 %
- Webnode5 %
- Drupal3 %
- ostatní53 %
The bar is low and that is your opening
With 89 % of sites below ninety points and a regional median of 61, you do not need the best website in the country. A site that loads fast on a phone, reads well on a small screen and meets the legal minimum already puts you in the top few percent of the region. Most of those numbers do not move with a bigger ad budget, they move with how the site is built.
What we do about itBy sector
A school, a municipality and a factory have different budgets and different duties. A single shared number would hide exactly the interesting part.
| Category | Measured | Median performance | Below 90 | WordPress |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Výroba | 95 | 60 | 83 | 35 |
| Ostatní | 74 | 61 | 64 | 28 |
| Obchod | 68 | 60 | 63 | 19 |
| Služby firmám | 66 | 63 | 60 | 23 |
| Stavebnictví | 32 | 63 | 29 | 12 |
| Veřejný sektor | 18 | 62 | 18 | 4 |
| Informační služby | 18 | 69 | 14 | 8 |
| Doprava | 9 | 59 | 8 | 2 |
| Ubytování a gastro | 4 | 59 | 3 | 1 |
| Vzdělávání a zdravotnictví | 2 | 63 | 2 | 1 |
What failed most often
The checks that failed most often across the measured sites. Not a matter of taste; each has a yes or no answer.
- Insufficient text contrast against the background66 % · 49
- Links that do not say where they lead59 % · 44
- The page reports errors in the browser38 % · 28
- Headings are out of order35 % · 26
- Buttons too close together for touch27 % · 20
- Images without a text description23 % · 17
- Buttons with no name for a screen reader22 % · 16
- Zoom is blocked on mobile16 % · 12
What the sites run on and whether it matters
The system is detected from what the page loads by itself, so there is no guessing here. More interesting than the counts is the median performance column: it shows whether speed is decided by the choice of system or by whoever built the site.
| System | Sites | Share | Median performance | Below 90 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No system detected | 36 | 49 % | 61 | 31 |
| WordPress | 28 | 38 % | 61 | 26 |
| Webnode | 4 | 5 % | 63 | 3 |
| Drupal | 2 | 3 % | 63 | 2 |
| Wix | 1 | 1 % | 46 | 1 |
| Webflow | 1 | 1 % | 60 | 1 |
| Next.js | 1 | 1 % | 99 | 0 |
| PrestaShop | 1 | 1 % | 52 | 1 |
Sites with no detected system are not necessarily hand built. The group holds static pages made years ago, sites built by a tool that leaves no trace, and pages with nothing but a heading and a phone number.
Add-ons on top of WordPress
Page builders and extensions that are not a system of their own. The share is counted from WordPress sites, not from all of them: a site with Elementor runs on WordPress, not on Elementor.
- Elementor32 % · 9
- WooCommerce29 % · 8
- Divi18 % · 5
- WPBakery18 % · 5
WordPress up close
The most common system in the sample. It is not a problem in itself, the problem is a version nobody updates.
Core version
- WordPress 7.032 % · 9
- WordPress 6.914 % · 4
- WordPress 6.57 % · 2
- WordPress 6.44 % · 1
- WordPress 6.34 % · 1
- older versions together18 % · 5
7.0.3 latest release at the time of measuring · 6 sites do not state their core version
Plugins
- At least one plugin behind57 % · 16
- Plugin untouched for over two years14 % · 4
PHP on the server
The server reports the version itself in the response header. Not reporting it is not a fault: it is a setting that costs nothing.
- PHP 8.429 % · 2
- PHP 7.429 % · 2 · no longer receives security fixes
- PHP 7.314 % · 1 · no longer receives security fixes
- PHP 7.214 % · 1 · no longer receives security fixes
- PHP 5.614 % · 1 · no longer receives security fixes
66 sites do not state their PHP version, which is fine
Every measured value on its own
If something is measured, it deserves its own number in the report. The speed bands are not ours: they are the thresholds Google uses.
How to read it: the large number is always the share of sites that are fine on that value. The bar below shows the whole split and the list under the bar says what each colour means. Amber "with a caveat" is not a fault: the site has the thing, just not the way it should. Red "needs work" is something to fix. The count of sites is in brackets.
Four Google scores
The green band starts at ninety.
Mobile performance
11 %are fine
- 90 a víc11 %(8)
- 50 až 8974 %(53)
- pod 5015 %(11)
- median 61
Accessibility
26 %are fine
- 90 a víc26 %(19)
- 50 až 8974 %(53)
- median 84
Best practices
74 %are fine
- 90 a víc74 %(53)
- 50 až 8925 %(18)
- pod 501 %(1)
- median 96
SEO
86 %are fine
- 90 a víc86 %(62)
- 50 až 8914 %(10)
- median 92
What speed is made of
The thresholds are Google's, not ours.
Time to main content (LCP)
10 %are fine
- do 2,5 s10 %(7)
- 2,5 až 4 s7 %(5)
- přes 4 s83 %(60)
Layout shift (CLS)
90 %are fine
- do 0,190 %(65)
- 0,1 až 0,251 %(1)
- přes 0,258 %(6)
Time the page cannot respond (TBT)
79 %are fine
- do 200 ms79 %(57)
- 200 až 600 ms15 %(11)
- přes 600 ms6 %(4)
Server response (TTFB)
100 %are fine
- do 0,8 s100 %(69)
Home page weight
18 %are fine
- do 1 MB18 %(13)
- 1 až 2,5 MB32 %(23)
- přes 2,5 MB50 %(36)
Files downloaded
39 %are fine
- do 5039 %(28)
- 50 až 10035 %(25)
- přes 10026 %(19)
Data from real visitors
Only sites with enough traffic.
Google only publishes this data for sites with enough traffic. 19 of the 74 measured sites have it, that is 26 %. For the rest only lab measurement on a simulated phone is available.
LCP for real visitors
89 %are fine
- do 2,5 s89 %(17)
- 2,5 až 4 s5 %(1)
- přes 4 s5 %(1)
Touch response for real visitors
100 %are fine
- do 200 ms100 %(15)
Hosting and security
Things set once that cost nothing.
Secure connection
84 %are fine
- fine84 %(61)
- with a caveat15 %(11)
- needs work1 %(1)
Enforced https
14 %are fine
- fine14 %(10)
- with a caveat86 %(63)
Security headers
11 %are fine
- fine11 %(8)
- with a caveat15 %(11)
- needs work74 %(54)
PHP version
29 %are fine
- fine29 %(2)
- needs work71 %(5)
Tracking and privacy
Third party code and cookie consent.
Tracking and advertising code
38 %are fine
- fine38 %(28)
- with a caveat55 %(40)
- needs work7 %(5)
Cookie consent
30 %are fine
- fine30 %(22)
- with a caveat47 %(34)
- needs work23 %(17)
Scripts from other domains
25 %are fine
- fine25 %(18)
- with a caveat63 %(46)
- needs work12 %(9)
Accessibility and controls
Whether the site works for weaker eyesight too.
Declared page language
86 %are fine
- fine86 %(63)
- needs work14 %(10)
Zoom on mobile
73 %are fine
- fine73 %(53)
- needs work27 %(20)
Images with descriptions
71 %are fine
- fine71 %(49)
- with a caveat10 %(7)
- needs work19 %(13)
Dark mode
3 %are fine
- fine3 %(2)
- with a caveat97 %(59)
Legal minimum
What every trader should have on their site.
Privacy policy
63 %are fine
- fine63 %(42)
- with a caveat37 %(25)
Business identification
43 %are fine
- fine43 %(28)
- with a caveat57 %(37)
Findability and upkeep
How the site shows in search and whether it lives.
Page title
77 %are fine
- fine77 %(56)
- with a caveat22 %(16)
- needs work1 %(1)
Search description
79 %are fine
- fine79 %(58)
- needs work21 %(15)
Link preview
42 %are fine
- fine42 %(31)
- with a caveat58 %(42)
Sitemap
78 %are fine
- fine78 %(57)
- with a caveat22 %(16)
Last change on the site
83 %are fine
- fine83 %(24)
- needs work17 %(5)
Year in the footer
37 %are fine
- fine37 %(16)
- with a caveat12 %(5)
- needs work51 %(22)
A high score on its own does not make a good website
The fastest sites in the sample are not well built modern sites. They are fast because there is almost nothing on them: static pages with no system, untouched for years, sometimes just a heading and a phone number. Speed is a condition, not a goal.
So read the score together with the other numbers. A site that is fast and also has something to say, works on a phone and meets the legal minimum is a different thing entirely from an empty page scoring ninety.
This is what one company's result looks like
This is what a company gets when it asks for its own report. It is a real measurement of a real site from this sample, only without the name, address, town or sector. It is chosen deterministically, so it does not change on every load.
What the site runs on
WordPress, Elementor, WooCommerce · WordPress 7.0.3 (poslední vydaná 7.0.3) · 5 doplňků, z toho 5 pozadu a 0 bez aktualizace přes dva roky
WordPress plugins
| Doplněk | Na webu | Poslední | Aktualizován |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blocksy Companion | 2.1.25 | 2.1.52 | 2026-08-06 |
| Elementor Website Builder – more than just a page builder | 3.34.3 | 4.2.2 | 2026-08-06 |
| Essential Addons for Elementor – Popular Elementor Templates & Widgets | 6.5.9 | 6.7.2 | 2026-07-29 |
| Ultimate Addons for Elementor | 2.8.2 | 2.9.2 | 2026-07-20 |
| WooCommerce | 10.4.4 | 11.0.0 | 2026-08-04 |
What failed in the measurement
- Insufficient text contrast against the background
Was your site in the survey?
Enter the address. We answer only yes or no. If yes, we will send you the full report along with how you compare to the other measured sites.
We only send the report to an address on that site's own domain. It is the only way to tell, without registration, that the site is yours, and to stop someone else from requesting your company's result.
How we measured it
The sample came from the regional company directory and from a manual list. For every company we verified in the business register that it exists, and live that the website really belongs to it. Companies listed in the regional directory but registered elsewhere stayed in: they operate here.
Measurement used Google PageSpeed Insights, on mobile, on the final address after redirects. A site that redirects from its domain to a language version would otherwise score worse than what a visitor experiences.
Our own reading takes only what the server serves to an ordinary browser: the home page, the response headers, the sitemap and the stylesheets the page links to. No admin addresses were probed. Before each site we read robots.txt and honoured it.
Parked domains and pages behind bot protection do not count as a company website. An empty domain would otherwise score beautifully on speed and skew the whole summary.
What these numbers do not say
The sample is not a random selection of all companies in the region. These are companies that once joined the regional directory, plus manual additions. Smaller firms and sole traders are under represented.
Lab measurement fluctuates by a few points between runs. That matters for a single site; across hundreds it evens out.
Some checks are uncertain for an individual site. A page assembled in the browser does not show us its footer, so we report that a privacy policy was not found, never that it is missing.
A finding is not an accusation. A low score does not mean the site is broken or that a bad supplier built it. It means there is something to work on.
We own up to our own errors. The first published version of this report carried two detection bugs: the WordPress core version was also read from jQuery, which lives in the same directory, and a plugin version from a library bundled inside the plugin. Sites therefore came out as years out of date while running the latest release. Both are fixed and all 386 sites were re-examined; the Google scores were left untouched so the report stays comparable with itself.
Manual check: we went through twelve randomly picked sites by hand against what their servers actually serve. The detected system, core version, PHP version, tracking code, cookie consent and legal details matched on all twelve.
What to do about it
If the numbers interest you for your own site, read the guide to choosing a supplier: it has a ten minute test you can run yourself and a tool that takes a site apart on the spot.