I measured 598 Ostrava business websites: nearly one in six is broken

How do business websites in Ostrava actually hold up? So I measured it. On 14 September 2026 I went through 598 websites of Ostrava shops, restaurants, offices and services that list a website in the open map OpenStreetMap. For each one I checked security, mobile display, basic SEO and, where measurable, speed according to Google PageSpeed. The method and aggregated data are available for download below.

Quick answer: what the measurement showed

93 of 598 websites (15.6%) are broken: the address listed in the map does not exist, the server does not respond or returns an error.
10.9% of measured websites have no mobile view (52 of 477).
14.8% do not redirect http to https (70 of 474) and 6.9% do not run on HTTPS at all (33 of 477).
29.6% have no meta description (141 of 477) and 28.1% have no H1 heading even after excluding pages that fill in content with JavaScript (118 of 420).
71.3% have no structured data with a business type (340 of 477), so neither Google nor AI assistants can tell what kind of business it is.
Only 4.2% of websites are fast on mobile according to Google PageSpeed (score 90 or more, 19 of 453), the median is 57 out of 100.

Method and public data

Where the business list comes from: the open map OpenStreetMap (ODbL licence), all businesses within the city of Ostrava that list a website. This is businesses recorded in the map, not a random or representative sample of all Ostrava companies.
What I excluded: schools, kindergartens, public offices, banks, pharmacies, hospitals and other institutions (252 records), links to aggregators, social networks and government sites (144), chains, meaning domains listed at three or more places in Ostrava (365 records), and duplicate domains (45). The chain rule also removed a few local businesses with several branches; it is the more cautious option. 598 unique domains remained.
When and how: 14 September 2026, one request to the homepage (HTTPS, falling back to HTTP) and one to check the http to https redirect. An identifiable User-Agent LeArtistStudie/1.0 with a contact link.
Respect for the sites: I fetched robots.txt first. Domains that disallow crawling the whole site were not measured. I publish only aggregated figures, no company names and no result tied to a specific website.
What I measured in the HTML: HTTPS and redirects, the HSTS header, mixed content (images, scripts and styles loaded over http), the mobile viewport, title, meta description, the H1 heading, JSON-LD structured data, a share image, a clickable phone number, a form, the footer year, server response time and HTML size.
Speed: Google PageSpeed Insights API, mobile strategy, lab measurement (Lighthouse), plus real-user data from the Chrome UX Report for sites with enough traffic.
Limitations: I read the HTML without running JavaScript. Sites built on page builders or purely in JavaScript may insert the heading or structured data with a script, so for H1 I also give a cautious figure that excludes pages with HTML under 15 kB. Server response time is a single measurement from one location, not a long-term average. Sites that returned 403 (bot protection) or were unreachable are excluded from the content percentages.

Download the anonymised aggregated dataset as CSV. The file contains metrics with numerator, denominator and a method note, without company names.

Finding 1: nearly one in six websites from the map does not work

Of 598 websites, the homepage loaded for 477 (79.8%). 93 websites (15.6%) were unreachable: the address did not exist, the server did not respond within 15 seconds or returned an error. Another 22 sites refused the automated request with bot protection, 4 addresses did not lead to a web page and 2 sites disallowed measurement in robots.txt, which I respected.

Some of the broken addresses may belong to businesses that have closed and the map simply is not up to date. For a customer the result is the same: they click the website in the map and find nothing. If your business is on maps, check the listed website address from time to time.

Finding 2: security is better than expected, but not everywhere

93.1% of measured websites run on HTTPS (444 of 477). Browsers mark the remaining 33 sites as not secure.
14.8% of websites do not redirect visitors from http to https (70 of 474). Anyone who types the address without https stays on the insecure version.
Only 30.8% of websites send the HSTS header (147 of 477), which tells the browser never to connect over http again.
7.9% of HTTPS websites load images, scripts or styles over insecure http (35 of 444). The browser then strikes the padlock or blocks the resource.

Finding 3: one in ten websites just shrinks on a phone

10.9% of websites have no mobile display set (52 of 477 without a viewport meta tag). A phone shows such a site as a shrunken desktop version and text has to be pinch-zoomed. Google ranks websites by their mobile version, so this also hurts in search.

Finding 4: search basics are missing more often than they should be

97.7% of websites have a page title (466 of 477), which is fine.
29.6% of websites have no meta description (141 of 477). Google then picks the snippet itself, often an unsuitable piece of text.
32.5% of websites have no H1 heading in the HTML (155 of 477). Excluding pages that fill in content with JavaScript, it is 28.1% (118 of 420), so this is a real issue, not a measurement artefact.
Only 48.6% have exactly one H1, as recommended (232 of 477).

Finding 5: Google and AI cannot tell what kind of business it is

Only 28.7% of websites have structured data with a business type (such as LocalBusiness, Restaurant or Store) (137 of 477). For the remaining 71.3%, search engines and AI assistants have to guess whether it is a restaurant, a shop or an office, and where it is located.
42.8% of websites have a social share image (og:image) (204 of 477). The rest show no preview or a random image when shared.
38.8% of websites have a clickable phone number on the homepage (185 of 477). For a business people call from their phone, this is one of the cheapest fixes.

226 websites show a copyright year. For 31% of them it is older than 2025 (70 of 226). Visitors easily conclude nobody looks after the site, even when the business is running normally.

Finding 7: servers are mostly fast, websites often are not

Median server response is 201 ms, 13.4% of websites respond slower than 800 ms (64 of 477).
Median HTML size is 84 kB uncompressed.
27.9% of websites run on WordPress (133 of 477). The builders Wix, Webnode and Shoptet each stay under 4%.

Finding 8: on mobile, websites are slow

Median mobile performance is 57 out of 100 according to Google PageSpeed (453 measured websites).
Only 4.2% of websites score 90 or more on mobile (19 of 453), which Google rates as good. A third of websites (33.3%) score below 50 (151 of 453).
For 87.9% of websites the main content appears later than 4 seconds on a simulated slower mobile connection (398 of 453). The median is 9.5 seconds. The lab test deliberately throttles the processor and network, so a real phone on good signal is usually faster. The figures show how a site holds up on a weaker phone.
On 11.7% of websites the content shifts noticeably while loading (CLS over 0.25, 53 of 453), so people tap something other than they meant.
62.9% of websites have real-user data from Chrome (285 of 453). Of those, Google rates 41.4% as fast (118), 35.1% as average (100) and 23.5% as slow (67).

The server responds in a median of 201 ms. So the delay mostly comes not from waiting for the server but from loading the page itself.

What this means for a business owner

Most of the issues found take an hour or two to fix and do not require a new website. If you run a business in Ostrava, go through your site in this order:

Does the address listed in maps and directories work? A broken website in a map loses customers before they even find you.
Does the site redirect http to https? It is switched on at your host or with one server rule.
Does the site look like a website on a phone, not a shrunken copy? A missing viewport is one line in the template.
Does the homepage have a meta description and one H1 heading? It decides what people see in Google results.
Does Google know you are a restaurant, shop or office and where you are? LocalBusiness structured data with address and opening hours also helps in maps and AI assistants.
Is the footer year current and is the phone number a link? A small detail that shapes the first impression.

Where you are stuck, I help fix running websites as part of website care. Usually you do not need a new website for it.

Frequently asked questions

How do I find out how my own website is doing?

The same checks as in this study run in the free website check on the home page: enter an address and within seconds you see security, mobile, SEO and speed from Google.

Is the sample representative of all businesses in Ostrava?

No. It describes businesses recorded in OpenStreetMap with a listed website. Shops and hospitality are recorded more often than offices or tradespeople, and companies without a website are not in the sample at all. Read the figures as a picture of this group, not the whole city.

Why are results missing for some sites?

HTML results are missing for 121 of 598 websites: 93 were unreachable or returned a server error, 22 refused the automated request with bot protection, 4 addresses did not lead to a web page and 2 sites disallowed measurement in robots.txt. In addition, Google PageSpeed could not measure speed for 24 websites because they refused the Lighthouse test or did not respond in time.

Will you publish which sites did badly?

No. The study is not meant to shame specific companies. Per-site results stay private and the published dataset contains aggregated figures only.

Sources and links

Speed: Google PageSpeed Insights API v5
Related: I measured 30 Czech e-shops: 80% have no AI crawler rules