NFW Web Studio
News
// State of the web, October 2026
v1.2.0

Garda businesses: how many have a website, and how well it works

We counted almost 350 Garda businesses and checked their websites in October 2026. Of these, almost 240 list a website, but more than one business in two has no working website.

330 businesses shown of 330 mapped in Garda
Map generated from Overture Maps data of September 18, 2026.
// At a glance

The numbers to remember

have a working website
47%
of almost 350 businesses counted
The rest, almost 180, have no website, or list one that does not open: an address that does not answer, a social profile.
to show the main content, on a phone
8.5 s
median of almost 140 sites, mean 11.2 s
More than three sites in four take longer than 4 seconds, the point Google calls poor. Past 3 seconds, 53% of people on a phone leave the page.
describe themselves to Google in full (structured data)
3%
of just over 150 businesses with a working website
Name, address, phone, website and opening hours in a block Google and AI assistants read without guessing.
have a valid sitemap
62%
of 150 working sites
38% of sites do not hand Google the list of their pages, which it uses to find them all.
median AI Crawlability Score, out of 100
65
across 150 working sites, mean 62.8
How well ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini can read and cite the site; half the sites score above it, half below. For general searches, reviews and ratings count as much.

Want to know where your site sits among these numbers?Run the free SEO audit

The Garda economy online: businesses and their websites

How many businesses there are, in which sectors, and how many have a website that actually opens.

The 333 businesses we counted, by sector. The three largest: lodging (33.9%), restaurants (17.7%), and fashion and beauty (7.5%).

The count comes from Overture Maps, an open dataset of places: these are the businesses a customer finds on a map, not the entries of the official business register.

Business types in the area
Share of the businesses counted
  • Lodging33.9% (113)
  • Restaurants17.7% (59)
  • Fashion and beauty7.5% (25)
  • Bars and pubs7.2% (24)
  • Food shops3.6% (12)
  • Beauty and wellness3.3% (11)
  • Construction3.3% (11)
  • Travel3.3% (11)
  • Real estate2.7% (9)
  • Home and tech2.4% (8)
  • Cafés1.8% (6)
  • Other sectors13.2% (44)

Of 333 businesses, 236 (70.9%) list a website and 157 (47.1%) have one that works.

The other 79 that list a website send customers to an address that does not answer, or to a social profile, a booking site or a delivery platform instead of a website. Someone tapping the link on a map gets an error, or a page that is not the business's own.

Businesses with a website

Of the 79 businesses that list a website we could not open, 30 (38%) point to a domain or server that does not answer, 19 (24.1%) open an error page, 13 (16.5%) have a site whose bot protection stopped our tool, 12 (15.2%) list a social profile or a platform page instead of a website, and 4 (5.1%) fail to connect, on a network error or a timeout.

A domain that does not answer has usually expired or lost its hosting; an error page is often the address of a site that was rebuilt or closed, left behind on the map. Among the profiles and platforms listed instead of a website, the most common is Instagram (5). The 13 businesses with a protected site are a separate case: the server answers with a bot check page (status 202 or 403), so the site most likely opens for someone visiting it in a browser, but we could not audit it. That is a limit of the tool, not a broken site: counting them, the businesses with a working website would rise to at most 170, 51.1%.

Why the listed website does not open

The bot protections recognised

  • SiteGround7 sites | 58.3%
  • Cloudflare1 sites | 8.3%
  • Not recognised4 sites | 33.3%

The share of businesses with a working website, sector by sector (sectors with at least 30 businesses). Best covered: lodging, 61.9%. Least covered: restaurants, 35.6%.

A sector at the bottom of the list does not mean worse businesses: in some sectors customers book or order through a platform, and the business lists that instead of a website.

Websites by sector
  • Working website, above average
  • Working website, below average
  • Listed, not working
  • No website
  • Garda average, every sector: 47.1%
Lodging11361.9%21.3%16.8%
Restaurants5935.6%40.7%23.7%

Speed and ease of use, on a phone

How long someone opening the site on a phone waits, and whether they can use it with a screen reader too.

What people do while they wait, according to research
  • 53%

    of people on a phone leave a page that takes longer than 3 seconds to load.

  • +103%

    more visitors leave straight away with a delay of just 2 seconds.

  • 7%

    fewer enquiries and sales for every extra 100 milliseconds of waiting.

Sources: Google, Akamai. Research on user behavior, not measurements from this scan.

On the main page of 140 sites, the median scores are 63 out of 100 for performance (mean 64.4), 88 for accessibility (mean 85.6), 96 for best practices (mean 90), and 92 for SEO (mean 90.5).

Performance sits in the middle band (50 to 89): the page works, but on a phone with a slow mobile connection the wait is noticeable. Half the sites take more than 8.5 seconds to show their main content, the largest photo or block of text: above 4 seconds, the point where Google calls it poor. Accessibility needs work: many sites still have low contrast text, buttons without a name, or form fields a screen reader cannot read.

Lighthouse scores of the home page

Being found on Google

The basics that help Google find every page, show the right one, and read the business's details.

Of 150 working sites, 38% have no valid sitemap, 62.7% show no Search Console verification we can see, 38.7% have no meta description on the home page, and 39.3% do not state a canonical URL for the home page.

A sitemap is the list of pages a site hands to Google. Search Console is the free tool where the owner sees which searches the site appears for and whether Google finds errors. The meta description is the text under the title in search results: without one, Google picks its own. A canonical URL tells Google which version of a page to show when several copies exist.

What working sites are missing

4 of 157 businesses with a working website (2.5%) have complete basic structured data: a LocalBusiness block and a WebSite block, both complete.

Structured data is a block hidden in the page that tells Google the business's name, address, phone and opening hours without leaving it to guess. For the business's own details one block matters most, LocalBusiness: it tells Google the name, address, phone and opening hours without leaving it to guess. Of the 157 businesses with a working website, 9.6% have one and only 4.5% have it complete; those that have one most often leave out opening hours (53.3%).

Businesses with complete structured data (JSON-LD)
  • Yes, complete
  • No, incomplete or missing
Yes, complete2.5%
No, incomplete or missing97.5%
What is missing among those with the block
Opening hoursLocalBusiness53.3%8 of 15
URLLocalBusiness6.7%1 of 15
NameWebSite6.3%3 of 48

Being read by AI assistants

More and more people ask an AI assistant instead of searching Google. For general questions, such as a good restaurant downtown or a hairdresser open on Monday, assistants rely mostly on the ratings and the number of reviews a business has on Google and on review sites.

The website becomes decisive for specific questions (the menu, prices, a particular service, holiday opening hours) and to confirm the business exists and is the right one: that is why the assistant has to be able to read it. 93.1% of sites show their text without needing to run JavaScript, and 80.7% let AI assistants' crawlers in.

Across 150 working sites the AI Crawlability Score median is 64.6 out of 100 (mean 62.8): half the sites score at least 64.6, and the middle half sits between 49.6 and 80.

The score says how well an assistant such as ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini can read the site and tell what the business is: whether the text shows without running code, whether the site lets their crawlers in, whether there is structured data. The check with the lowest result is "ARD manifest for AI agents": only 0% of sites pass it.

Median AI Crawlability Score
The score weighs ten checks: here is which ones, and how much each counts.
  • 64.6/100 Garda

Trust: HTTPS and blocklisted servers

Trust plays out on two fronts. The first is visible: 14% of sites do not use HTTPS, and the browser writes "Not secure" next to the address, right where a customer is about to leave their name and phone number in a form.

The second is invisible, and it is about email. A server flagged for spam does the website no harm, which opens and shows up in search results as before; but email sent from that server can land in customers' spam folders and never be read.

We checked the server of every working site against three spam blocklists (Spamhaus, Barracuda and SpamCop). Of 148 sites with an answer, 1 (0.7%) sit on a blocklisted server: 1 servers out of 123.

A spam blocklist lists the addresses spam was sent from. It does the website no harm: the site opens and shows up on Google as before. The risk is email: if the business sends it from that server, confirmations, quotes and replies to customers can land in the spam folder and never be read. The server is often shared with many other sites, and the flag comes from one of them.

Sites on spam blocklisted servers
Garda
  • Blocklisted0.7%
  • Not blocklisted98%
  • No answer1.3%
1 blocklisted servers out of 123 checked
// Your site

Try it on your site

The free audit runs the same checks as this report on your site: it reads the pages, measures the home page with Lighthouse, computes the AI Crawlability Score and tells you how it compares with the sites of your city. No sign up, up to 4 sites an hour.

  • SEO
  • Speed
  • Core Web Vitals
  • AI Crawlability Score
  • Compared with your city

Source: NFW Web Studio scan of 333 businesses, data updated on October 16, 2026.

// The technical detail

The same measurements, by their technical names

For developers: how the 150 working sites divide, not just their average. Here are the Core Web Vitals against Google's thresholds, JavaScript, image and font weight, file formats, technologies, what the structured data is made of, and the AI Crawlability Score's individual checks.

Performance, across 139 sites: half score below 63, one in four below 53, one in ten above 93. Median accessibility 88, SEO 92, AI Crawlability Score 64.6.

Each bar runs from the 10th to the 90th percentile; the thick part is the middle half of the sites, from the 25th to the 75th, and the mark is the median. A long bar means sites that differ a lot; a short one, sites that are alike.

Lighthouse and AI Crawlability Scores: the spread
  • Garda
PerformanceGarda405363759364
AccessibilityGarda718088949686
Best practicesGarda73809610010090
SEOGarda82859210010091
AI Crawlability ScoreGarda34.149.664.68089.362.8

Medians across 139 sites: first content (FCP) 2.7 s, main content (LCP) 8.5 s, page on screen (Speed Index) 4.9 s, blocking time (TBT) 150 ms, and server response (TTFB) 138 ms.

Against Google's thresholds, the median is good for TBT and TTFB, in need of improvement for FCP and Speed Index, and poor for LCP. These are lab measurements: Lighthouse simulates a mid-range phone on a slow mobile connection, so the times are longer than on an office computer. Interactivity (INP) cannot be measured in the lab.

Home page load times: Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse
  • Garda
  • Google's "good" threshold
First content on screen (FCP)Garda1.1 s1.9 s2.7 s3.5 s6.8 s3.5 s
Main content on screen (LCP)Garda2.5 s4.9 s8.5 s13.7 s22.4 s11.2 s
Page on screen (Speed Index)Garda2.0 s3.2 s4.9 s8.2 s11.5 s6.3 s
Blocking time (TBT)Garda1 ms46 ms150 ms325 ms814 ms272 ms
Server response (TTFB)Garda15 ms36 ms138 ms474 ms1.5 s523 ms

JavaScript downloaded by the home page: median 668 kB, one site in ten above 1.6 MB. Layout shift (CLS): 75th percentile 0.02, 90th percentile 0.20.

JavaScript has to be downloaded and run by the phone before the page responds to taps: the heavier it is, the harder the phone works. Three sites in four stay within 0.10, Google's good threshold: content does not jump around while the page loads, but one site in ten goes above 0.20.

JavaScript weight and layout stability
  • Garda
JavaScript downloadedGarda94 kB300 kB668 kB1.1 MB1.6 MB778 kB
  • Garda
  • Google's "good" threshold
Layout shift (CLS)Garda0000.020.200.06

Median weight per file: images 30 kB, fonts 37 kB, preview image (og:image) 138 kB. One image in ten is above 373 kB.

A photo of a few hundred kB makes sense full screen, not as a thumbnail: the heaviest files are what slow a page down on a phone. The scale is logarithmic: each tick is ten times the one before.

File weight, by kind
  • Garda
ImagesGarda659 B4 kB30 kB141 kB373 kB171 kB
FontsGarda8 kB17 kB37 kB66 kB128 kB57 kB
FaviconsGarda887 B2 kB5 kB14 kB36 kB31 kB
Preview image (og:image)Garda15 kB51 kB138 kB272 kB454 kB206 kB
VideosGarda2.2 MB7.8 MB10.1 MB71.7 MB95.6 MB40.5 MB

Of the 4,759 images found, 12.2% use a modern format (WebP or AVIF), 49.9% JPG and 23.7% PNG. Of the fonts, 79.1% are WOFF2.

At the same quality, WebP and AVIF are usually much lighter than JPG and PNG: the same photo reaches the phone sooner and uses less data.

File formats
Images
  • JPG
  • PNG
  • SVG
  • WEBP
  • Other
JPG49.9%
PNG23.7%
SVG10.9%
WEBP8.1%
Other7.5%
Fonts
  • WOFF2
  • TTF
  • WOFF
  • F
  • Other
WOFF279.1%
TTF7.8%
WOFF4.2%
F3.6%
Other5.3%
Favicons
  • PNG
  • ICO
  • JPG
  • O
  • Other
PNG66.7%
ICO17.5%
JPG9.2%
O2.2%
Other4.4%
Preview image (og:image)
  • JPG
  • PNG
  • WEBP
  • SVG
  • Other
JPG72.2%
PNG17.4%
WEBP5.2%
SVG3.5%
Other1.7%
Videos
  • MP4
  • 4
  • Other
MP487.5%
412.5%
Other0%

Across 145 working sites we recognized 274 different technologies. The most common: jQuery (64.7%), PHP (48%), and Google Font API (43.3%). The most used CMS is WordPress, on 29.3% of sites.

Technologies are recognized with Wappalyzer on the main page only, after its JavaScript has run: a technology used only on inner pages can be missed. The filter above shows one category at a time.

Most used technologies
  1. 01
    jQueryJavaScript libraries
    64.7%
  2. 02
    Open Graph
    53.3%
  3. 03
    PHPProgramming languages
    48%
  4. 04
    Google Font APIFont scripts
    43.3%
  5. 05
    Google Tag ManagerTag managers
    43.3%
  6. 06
    Google AnalyticsAnalytics
    42%
  7. 07
    Font AwesomeFont scripts
    37.3%
  8. 08
    BootstrapUI frameworks
    32%
  9. 09
    MySQLDatabases
    32%
  10. 10
    HTTP/3
    31.3%
  11. 11
    NginxWeb servers
    31.3%
  12. 12
    WordPressBlogs
    29.3%
jQuery64.7%
Open Graph53.3%
PHP48%
Google Font API43.3%
Google Tag Manager43.3%
Google Analytics42%
Font Awesome37.3%
Bootstrap32%
MySQL32%
HTTP/331.3%
Nginx31.3%
WordPress29.3%
jQuery Migrate28.7%
jQuery UI26.7%
RSS24%
core-js22.7%
Swiper20.7%
Priority Hints18.7%
Apache HTTP Server18%
Cloudflare18%
Masonry18%
Contact Form 716.7%
Google Maps16.7%
iubenda16%
Plesk14.7%
GSAP14%
Isotope14%
Elementor13.3%
Twitter Emoji (Twemoji)13.3%
PWA12.7%
Yoast SEO11.3%
React10.7%
reCAPTCHA10.7%
Aruba.it10%
Microsoft ASP.NET10%
WPML10%
OWL Carousel9.3%
cdnjs9.3%
Cart Functionality8.7%
Cookiebot8.7%
Modernizr8.7%
Slider Revolution8.7%
Lodash8%
lit-element8%
lit-html8%
Animate.css7.3%
Cookie Control7.3%
Moment.js7.3%
Cybot6%
PhotoSwipe6%
Sentry6%
Slick6%
Amazon Web Services5.3%
Facebook Pixel5.3%
Popper5.3%
wpBakery5.3%
CFML4.7%
Cloudflare Turnstile4.7%
CookieYes4.7%
Google Ads4.7%
Google Ads Conversion Tracking4.7%
Google Hosted Libraries4.7%
IIS4.7%
Vue.js4.7%
Windows Server4.7%
Axios4%
FancyBox4%
HeadJS4%
Site Kit4%
WooCommerce4%
YouTube4%
basket.js4%
jsDelivr4%
AOS3.3%
Caddy3.3%
Cloudflare Bot Management3.3%
Cookie Script3.3%
Facebook Login3.3%
Ionicons3.3%
LazySizes3.3%
Leaflet3.3%
Next.js3.3%
Polylang3.3%
Redux Framework3.3%
Select23.3%
Store Vantage3.3%
Tailwind CSS3.3%
Underscore.js3.3%
Wix3.3%
AlmaLinux2.7%
Chart.js2.7%
DataTables2.7%
Elementor Header & Footer Builder2.7%
Flickity2.7%
GTranslate2.7%
Google Call Conversion Tracking2.7%
Google Cloud2.7%
Google Cloud CDN2.7%
Htmx2.7%
Lightbox2.7%

Of the 157 businesses with a working website, 38.2% have at least one JSON-LD block, but only 2.5% have complete basic data. The most common types on the sites are WebSite (31.3%), BreadcrumbList (22%), and WebPage (22%).

WebSite, WebPage and BreadcrumbList describe the site and its pages, and an SEO plugin often adds them on its own. To tell Google and AI assistants who the business is, where it is and when it is open, it takes a complete LocalBusiness block.

Basic structured data (JSON-LD)

What we count as complete

A business has complete basic structured data when the pages of its site carry both of these JSON-LD blocks:

  • LocalBusiness or one of its subtypes (Restaurant, Dentist, Store, LegalService...), with name, a structured address (PostalAddress, not free text), telephone, URL and opening hours.
  • WebSite with the site's name and URL.

Each block can appear on any of the analyzed pages. A block missing even one of these counts as incomplete. Shares are of the businesses with a working website.

35.7%
61.8%
  • Complete 2.5%
  • Some JSON-LD, basics incomplete 35.7%
  • No JSON-LD 61.8%
LocalBusinessComplete 4.5%
  • Complete 4.5%
  • Incomplete 5.1%
  • Missing 90.4%
Missing from LocalBusiness
  • Opening hours53.3%
  • URL6.7%
  • Name0%
  • Address0%
  • Telephone0%
WebSiteComplete 28.7%
  • Complete 28.7%
  • Incomplete 1.9%
  • Missing 69.4%
Missing from WebSite
  • Name6.3%
  • URL0%

Across 150 working sites, the check with the highest result is "Home page title" (94), the one with the lowest "ARD manifest for AI agents" (0). The robots.txt lets AI crawlers in on 80.7% of sites.

Each check has a weight, written under its name: a site's score is the weighted average of the checks that could be verified. A check the scan could not verify does not count as failed, and the site is judged on the others.

The AI Crawlability Score's checks
  • 93.1%
    Content visible without JavaScript
    weight 20
  • 80.7%
    robots.txt open to AI crawlers
    weight 15
  • 36.7%
    Structured data on the home page
    weight 15
  • 62%
    Sitemap
    weight 10
  • 23.3%
    llms.txt file
    weight 10
  • 94%
    Home page title
    weight 5
  • 90.5%
    Lighthouse SEO score
    weight 5
  • 86%
    HTTPS
    weight 5
  • 61.3%
    Home page meta description
    weight 5
  • 60.7%
    Home page canonical
    weight 5
  • 0%
    ARD manifest for AI agents
    weight 5
// Digging deeper

What else the working sites show

Cuts of the 150 working sites beyond the headline figures. A site counts once, only home pages are measured, and a group needs at least 10 sites to appear.

Sector by sector

Mean Lighthouse performance and AI Crawlability Score of the working sites of each sector with at least 10 sites. A site counts once, in the sector most of its businesses are in.

SectorSitesPerformanceAI Crawlability Score
Lodging6662.858.6
Restaurants2172.162.3

What the sites run on

Technologies detected on the home page of 145 of 150 working sites, with the mean scores of the sites that use each.

Technologies
TechnologySitesSharePerformanceAI Crawlability Score
jQuery9764.7%61.465.9
Open Graph8053.3%62.868.4
PHP7248%60.968.8
Google Font API6543.3%60.467.8
Google Tag Manager6543.3%5869.1
Google Analytics6342%58.369
Font Awesome5637.3%59.261.9
Bootstrap4832%60.464.1
CDN
CDNSitesSharePerformanceAI Crawlability Score
None detected11576.7%64.359.7
google138.7%58.583
cloudflare128%69.272.7

Content basics

57.3% of the sites have at least one page that repeats a word above the density our crawler flags as keyword stuffing.

On the home page, 18% of titles are longer than 60 characters and 38.7% of the sites have no meta description. 21.3% repeat the same title on more than one page.

Security

86% of the sites answer on HTTPS, and 94.6% of those redirect plain HTTP to it.

Of 128 certificates checked, 100% are valid and 0.8% expire within 30 days.

Security headers on the home page: 22.7% send Strict-Transport-Security and 6.7% a Content-Security-Policy. We check that a header is present, not how strong it is.

// This scan

The Garda scan, at a glance

Period
On October 16, 2026
Kind of scan
Quick: home page and first 4 sitemap pages; Lighthouse and technologies on the home page only
Area
City of Garda
Businesses counted
333
Working sites analyzed
150
National comparison
Not yet: it takes at least two cities in Italy scanned on the same scanner version
Data updated
October 16, 2026
Overture Maps data
September 18, 2026
Scanner version
v1.2.0
How we measure: the full method
// Data and limits

Where the data comes from

The businesses and the website they list come from Overture Maps, an open dataset of places. We use no other source to find websites: every site analyzed is the one listed on the business's Overture entry.

Places have no single licence for the whole theme: each provider has its own, all permissive. CDLA Permissive 2.0 for Meta, Microsoft, PinMeTo, Krick, RenderSEO, DAC and BrightQuery, Apache 2.0 for Foursquare (whose data was transformed to Overture's schema) and CC0 1.0 for AllThePlaces.

Administrative boundaries (the divisions theme) are licensed ODbL and come from OpenStreetMap, geoBoundaries, Esri Community Maps and LINZ. That is why our reports carry the line Overture gives for data that includes OpenStreetMap.

Overture's page states no sharing or derived data obligations beyond that line: we add no conditions that are not there, and refer to each source's own licence for the details.

Attribution
© OpenStreetMap contributors, Overture Maps Foundation

What this scan read

  • Overture dataset of September 18, 2026.
  • 75 of the 225 sites we tried to analyze did not answer or blocked our tool (33.3%): the web figures cover the other 150.
  • AI Crawlability Score computed with rules 2.0.0. It is our own measure, not an industry standard.

What these figures do and do not measure

A report says precise things, and only those. These are the limits to keep in mind when quoting one of its figures.

  • Homepage only. Lighthouse and the AI Crawlability Score measure each site's main page, not the whole site: the figure is that of a shop window, not of every page.
  • Working sites only. The web figures cover the sites that answer. Sites that do not answer, or that block our tool, are left out: a site behind a bot check can be unmeasurable while working for a visitor.
  • Only businesses that list a website on Overture. A business with no website on its listing is not measured on the web, and a listing with an old website leads to a page that does not open. Every report says how many businesses list a website and how many have a working one.
  • A sample, not a register. Overture is not the business register: it covers some businesses and some areas better than others, so the picture can lean towards businesses with a well kept listing.
  • A site counts once. When several businesses list the same site, it counts once in the web figures. Business counts count each one.
  • One language. Our tool presents itself as an Italian browser: a multilingual site is measured in its Italian version.
  • Search Console is recognised only from a meta tag or the DNS, so the real share can be higher than the one we show.
  • The AI Crawlability Score is our own measure, not a market standard: it cannot be compared with outside tools. It changes with rules versions, and two reports compare only on the same scanner and the same rules.
  • Cities only, and only averages and medians. Reports do not say who is best in a sector or which studios do better, and they publish no single business's result.
// frequently asked questions

The answers, to your questions.

We counted 333 businesses in Garda. 236 of them (70.9%) list a website, but only 157 (47.1%) have one that works: the other addresses do not answer, or lead to a social profile or a booking site. The scan ran on October 16, 2026.
The Garda scan does not have enough businesses yet to compare sectors.
If it is based in Garda and appears on Overture Maps, probably yes. We do not publish results for single businesses or single sites, here or in the open data. If you want to see yours, book the free 30 minute call: we show you how it came out of the scan, meaning speed, SEO, AI readability and technologies, and what we would fix first. Or run the free SEO audit on your site right away: the same checks as this report, compared with the sites of your city.
The things this report finds missing most often are also the cheapest to fix: connecting Search Console, writing a meta description for the home page, having a valid sitemap, adding a complete LocalBusiness block with opening hours, converting images to WebP or AVIF, and adding a preview image for shares. For general searches, ratings and reviews matter most: keeping the Google listing up to date is worth as much as the website. The free SEO audit shows you in a few minutes which of these your site is missing; on the free call we go through them together.
The figures are free to use, commercial use included, as long as you cite the source (CC BY 4.0 license). Cite NFW Web Studio, the page title and its link, for example: NFW Web Studio, "Garda businesses, October 2026", https://www.nfw.run/state-of-the-web/garda-city-october-2026-v1-2-0. The aggregate figures are also available as JSON at https://dashboard.nfw.run/state-of-the-web/v1/scans/7415d98b-e5ea-4900-83d3-26103c556f21. If you need a figure that is not here, write to us.
A landing page starts from €520 and a full website from €1,160, VAT included. These are starting prices: after a call, you get a written quote with a single figure within 24 hours. A landing page takes under 7 days, a full website starts from 7 days. With the express option, timelines are halved and guaranteed: online within 48 hours for a landing page and 96 hours for a full website.
Yes to both. We are based in Verona, and when it makes sense we come and see the shop, workshop or venue: understanding the space helps us describe it on the site. We also work remotely with businesses across Italy and Europe, with the same method and timelines: only the way we meet changes, a video call instead of a coffee.
You can, and to get started it may be enough. Before you choose, check the things this report measures on every site: how long it takes to open on a phone, whether it has a sitemap, whether it describes the business in a way Google and AI assistants can read. Some free builders cover them, some do not, and some do not let you change them. To check them you can use the free SEO audit; if you like, we can look at what you built together on the free call.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Contact us

// ready when you are

Your website, online within a week.

Write to us today: we reply within 24 hours with the next steps.

  • Meet in person or by video call
  • Written quote within 24 hours
  • Published prices, VAT included
  • Online within a week
  • The site stays yours
Contact for Garda
Enrico: Software Engineer
enrico@nfw.run
Available for in-person meetings in San Giovanni Lupatoto and Verona, and by video call across Italy and Europe.