We pointed P1·QA at P1·QA.
It scored 61.8%. Grade C. We are publishing the whole thing, because a QA company that only shows you its wins is not a QA company.
Target https://p1qa.com · 3 agents · 36 checks · artifact reports/P1QA-demo-audit-2026-03-31.json
Overall pass rate
Grade C
Findings on our own site
1 critical · 5 high · 11 medium · 3 low
Checks executed
24 passed · 12 failed
Wall-clock runtime
3 agents, start to report
Agent by agent
The free audit runs three agents. Our accessibility scored an A. Our SEO scored an F. Both numbers are below, unedited.
| Agent | Discipline | Grade | Pass rate | Checks | Passed | Failed | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aegis | Security | C | 68.8% | 16 | 11 | 5 | 10 |
| Prism | Accessibility | A | 91.7% | 12 | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| Indexer | SEO | F | 25.0% | 8 | 2 | 6 | 9 |
| Overall | C | 61.8% | 36 | 24 | 12 | 20 | |
The 5 high-severity findings
Verbatim from the 31 March 2026report — and what we shipped since.
- SEC-001Missing content-security-policy headerSecurity HeadersFixed — CSP shipped with a report-uri endpoint
- SEC-002Missing strict-transport-security headerSecurity HeadersFixed — HSTS, max-age 1 year, includeSubDomains + preload
- SEC-009No clickjacking protectionClickjackingFixed — X-Frame-Options: DENY + frame-ancestors 'none'
- SEC-010Security header score 10/100 — Grade FSecurity ScoreFixed — Full header set: CSP, HSTS, XFO, nosniff, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy
- SEO-001Missing meta descriptionTechnical SEOFixed — Per-page metadata + self-referencing canonicals
What this run is — and is not
Read this before you quote the number
- It is a 3-agent free audit, not the full 20-agent suite. A full suite takes longer and checks far more.
- The one “critical” in the count was our own scanner erroring (require is not defined), not a defect on the page. We logged it, fixed the scanner, and left it in the tally rather than quietly deleting it.
- This is a point-in-time snapshot from 31 March 2026. Several of these findings have since been fixed. Re-run it yourself and compare.
- A pass rate measures the site being scanned, not the scanner. 61.8% is a statement about p1qa.com, not about P1·QA's accuracy.
Why there are no customer case studies here
Because we do not have published customer results yet. Writing three plausible-sounding companies with plausible-sounding executives saying plausible-sounding things would be faster than this page. It would also be a lie, and you would be trusting us to find lies in your software.
So instead: our own scan, our own bad grade, the raw artifact name, and the caveats. When a customer agrees to be named with real numbers, those numbers will appear here with the same provenance.
Run the same scan on your app
Same three agents, same checks, same report format. No signup. You will get a grade, and it might be worse than ours.
Free QA Audit