Lead Magnet Landing Page Comparator
Compare a lead magnet landing page to two competitors' on SEO, UX and CRO criteria specific to trading an email for content: minimal form, CTA, no distractions.
This tool analyzes the page's HTML structure (CTAs, forms, trust signals, pricing, navigation) and its loading performance. It cannot measure a real conversion rate: that requires the analyzed site's own tracking (Contentsquare, Hotjar, GA4...), which isn't accessible on a third-party URL.
🕵️
How to use this tool
- 1Enter your landing page URL and up to two competitors'
- 2Run the comparison
- 3Review which criteria pass or fail, with the advice for each
Why it matters
A lead magnet landing page only asks for an email in exchange for content: one extra form field or one navigation distraction is enough to tank the conversion rate. This tool checks these precise criteria.
A concrete example
On a typical lead magnet landing page, the tool might find a 4-field form (email, first name, last name, company) when only one is actually required for the download. Each extra field measurably reduces the conversion rate: the report quantifies this point before any other adjustment.
Frequently asked questions
Does this tool measure a real conversion rate?
No. A real conversion rate requires tracking specific to the site (Google Analytics, Contentsquare, Hotjar...), which isn't accessible on a third-party URL. The tool analyzes the page structure that correlates with conversion, without measuring it directly.
What do FCP, LCP, CLS and INP/TBT mean?
These are the Core Web Vitals, the indicators Google uses to assess a page's loading experience. FCP (First Contentful Paint) measures the time until the first visible element appears. LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) measures the time until the largest visible element appears. CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) measures visual stability during loading. INP (Interaction to Next Paint) measures the page's actual responsiveness to interactions; TBT (Total Blocking Time) is its lab equivalent.
What's the difference between PSI, Lighthouse and CrUX?
PageSpeed Insights (PSI) is the Google API this tool uses. It combines two sources: Lighthouse, a lab test that simulates loading on a standardized device and network, and CrUX (Chrome User Experience Report), which aggregates real measurements from Chrome users who visited the page. This tool's "Mobile performance" score comes from Lighthouse. The Core Web Vitals block shows CrUX data when available, otherwise the Lighthouse lab estimate.
Why does the Core Web Vitals block sometimes show a lab estimate instead of field data?
CrUX only returns data if the page received enough Chrome traffic over the last 28 days. Below that threshold, common on lower-traffic sites or recent pages, no field data exists: the tool then falls back to the Lighthouse lab estimate, a simulated test rather than a real measurement.
Why does the indicator become TBT instead of INP in the lab estimate?
INP measures real responsiveness to actual visitor interactions: it can only be measured on real traffic, not in a lab test where no one interacts with the page. TBT is the closest lab indicator: it estimates the time the page stays blocked and unable to respond quickly to an interaction.
How many fields should a lead magnet form have?
Ideally just one (email), two at most. Each additional field measurably reduces the conversion rate on this type of page.
Why not just ask for more info upfront to qualify the lead?
That's a legitimate trade-off, but every extra field has a cost in lead volume. Best practice is to qualify afterward (follow-up email, behavioral scoring), not at the moment of the first exchange for content.
Does the tool assess the quality of the content offered in exchange for the email?
No, it can't judge the perceived value of the deliverable itself (guide, checklist, webinar). It only checks the structural criteria of the page around it: form, CTA, absence of distraction.