Ghost website UX review
A scan-backed analysis of how Ghost performs across usability, visual clarity, and UX best practices. Use it as a reference for what to borrow, what to question, and what to test on your own site.
Sensei score: 90 out of 100
Aesthetic
80Practices
80How Ghost looks
The verdict
Visual execution leads for Ghost
Ghost receives a Sensei score of 90/100. Visual execution leads at 80/100, while functional clarity sits at 79/100. That spread gives this landing review a concrete shape: the stronger layer establishes the page's baseline, and the lower layer identifies where another pass could be most useful.
Observed UX signals
- Majorfunctional
Accessibility
Multiple theme gallery images (10+ instances) have null or missing alt text. These appear to be decorative theme previews, but if they serve as product examples or differentiation signals, users relying on screen readers cannot access this content.
- Majorfunctional
TrustCredibility
The headline claim '$100,000,000+ Revenue earned each year by publications running on Ghost, with 0% payment fees' lacks attribution, methodology, or time period. This is a significant financial claim that could influence purchasing decisions but provides no verifiable source or context.
- Minorfunctional
ConversionOptimization
The referral/discount messaging ('You've been referred!' and 'has gifted you') uses placeholder-like language that appears incomplete or context-dependent. The actual discount amount or offer terms are not visible in the page data, creating ambiguity about what the user is receiving.
More UX reviews
Browse all →How does your site score?
Get the same layer-by-layer UX review for your homepage, pricing page, or product page.