Your landing page’s weakest score is Trust.
How Gritstone bio ranks
- 1.
Moderna62
- 2.
Gritstone bio57
- 3.
BioNTech57
- 4.
CureVac49
- 5.
TareBio44
57Growth scoreupdated
category scores
category scoresShowHide
Trust
38PoorProof that the product is real, competent, and safe to try.
| Trust read | |
|---|---|
| Gritstone bio | No visible trust signal identified. |
| No visible trust signal identified. | |
| Nav links to "Investors", "Clinical trials" and "Healthcare professionals" | |
| Headline "Recapping Positive Phase 3 Topline Results for Intismeran Autogene Plus Pembrolizumab in Adjuvant Melanoma" | |
| "CureVac is now part of the BioNTech Group (Nasdaq: BNTX)" acquisition statement on the desktop fold |
Value props
48PoorTitle, subtitle, hero — do they sell the product's true value?
Gritstone bio’s headline undersells
Pursuing More Potent and Durable Immune Responses for Cancer
Working
- Names the disease area plainly
- 'Potent and durable' is an outcome claim
- Honest tone, no hype stack
Could improve
- No subhead or mechanism named
- Zero numbers or clinical proof
- Hero image decorates, shows nothing
CTA
58FairCopy, size, verb, cost-feel — does the primary CTA earn the click?
How Gritstone bio compares
Recommended rewrites
Mobile web
70FairThe phone experience as a first-class citizen.
What works
What to improve
Information hierarchy
72FairDoes the design help or inhibit what the page is trying to say?
What works
What to improve