UX Signal

Designers, agencies and product teams need to show clients or stakeholders that a design has real UX problems, but today they rely on subjective opinions or generic chatbot feedback that never actually renders the page, gives a different answer every run, and produces nothing concrete to show anyone. Lighthouse and similar tools only measure what a machine can score, like load times and markup, missing whether a message lands, where the eye goes, or what erodes trust. Teams also struggle to audit experiences behind a login without sharing credentials, and have no consistent, repeatable yardstick to prove whether a redesign actually improved things over time. The result is that UX work gets sold and evaluated on vibes rather than proof.

UX Signal takes a pasted URL, detects whether it's a marketing site, e-commerce store, marketplace or product, and renders it at desktop, tablet and mobile viewports before checking it against 56 weighted UX heuristics drawn from published sources like Nielsen's heuristics, WCAG 2.2, Laws of UX, Baymard, Stanford Web Credibility Guidelines and Google's web guidance. It returns a score out of 100 split into ten weighted categories (Clarity, Navigation, Trust, Accessibility, Mobile, Performance, etc.) tuned to the site type, with the biggest issues explained in plain English and tied to evidence screenshots. A Chrome extension called Capture lets users audit logged-in experiences by photographing chosen screens directly in their own browser so credentials never leave it, then scores them with product-specific categories like task efficiency and onboarding. The product also tracks change history to show score movement after fixes, and includes a Figma integration to audit designs before they're built.