Cycling through all six. Tap any point to stop.

Measured on six things

Free in-browser tools to test mouse buttons, scroll, double-click, CPS, and DPI.

Security

HTTPS enforced and processing is client-side, but the header probe scored 3/12: no HSTS, CSP, frame protection, Referrer-Policy or Permissions-Policy, and DMARC is missing. No published audits or security page.

Screenshots

1 / 1

Mouse Test Lab

About this app

Mouse Test Lab is a free set of in-browser tools for checking a computer mouse. It is for PC gamers, people buying a used mouse, and anyone whose mouse has started double-clicking, skipping, or missing buttons. On the homepage you can test left, right, middle, and side buttons plus the scroll wheel, and it flags double-click bounce. Related tools measure clicks-per-second, polling rate up to 8000 Hz, real DPI, scroll-wheel skips, aim accuracy, and common click techniques. Nothing to install or sign up for, and results stay on your device. In Chrome and Edge the polling-rate test can read raw mouse events, so readings above 1000 Hz are possible; Firefox and Safari group events per frame and read lower.

Key features

1Live in-browser button and scroll-wheel tester with a 0/7 checklist and double-click bounce detection using a 50ms/80ms threshold scale.
2Polling rate test reading up to 8000 Hz via raw mouse events in Chrome and Edge, plus DPI analyzer and CPS tests from 1 to 300 seconds.
3No install, no signup, client-side processing — plus a downloadable report and a 19-tool index covering CPS, jitter, butterfly, drag and Kohi clicking.

Target customer profile

Drawn from the product itself, not from a survey.

Demographic

PC gamers (especially FPS and Minecraft PvP players)

Pain points

Missed clicks in-game, double-click faults causing unintended actions, need to benchmark CPS and polling rate.

Primary needs

Accurate click and scroll diagnostics, CPS testing, polling rate measurement, and double-click detection.

Demographic

Remote workers and office professionals

Pain points

Mouse buttons not registering, scroll wheel jumping, side buttons not working due to remapping.

Primary needs

Quick verification of mouse functionality, troubleshooting guides, and no-install browser-based testing.

Demographic

Tech enthusiasts and PC builders

Pain points

Buying used mice without knowing their condition, needing to validate DPI and sensor performance.

Primary needs

Comprehensive mouse health check, DPI analyzer, polling rate test, and detailed event logs.

Scout Review

Written by AI from measured evidence, scored out of 100.

Mouse Test Lab is a focused, genuinely useful browser toolkit for diagnosing a misbehaving mouse, and it executes the core idea well. The tester is the first thing on the page, it needs no install or signup, and it covers far more ground than the alternatives — buttons, scroll wheel, double-click bounce, CPS, polling rate up to 8000 Hz, DPI and aim. Performance is excellent (99 mobile / 100 desktop Lighthouse) and the design is purposeful. The gaps are unglamorous but real: thin security headers, a contrast failure on the very text that explains the results, and a primary CTA that hides next to a secondary button. None of these are hard to fix, and fixing them would move this from 'good free tool' to 'the one you bookmark.'

Measure by measure

Usability

Near-zero friction: no signup, no install, the tester is live on load with a 0/7 checklist and a clear pass/grey-zone/fault scale. Anchor chips and a 19-tool index help. Primary CTA is oddly understated.

Design

Clean, purposeful instrument aesthetic: the interactive mouse diagram leads the page under a navy H1, with a consistent grid motif and palette. Held back by tiny pale-grey secondary text and a long, repetitive lower half.

Speed

Lighthouse 99/100 mobile and 100/100 desktop, LCP 906ms, TBT 34ms, CLS 0.068. A static, lightweight page that loads essentially instantly — exactly what a diagnostic tool should be.

Security

Accessibility

Lighthouse 97/100 with a single failing contrast audit, independently echoed by the visual audit's tiny pale-grey text. Keyboard-friendly, responsive, no a11y statement or multi-language support found.

Growth

A real, specific problem (double-click bounce, dead buttons, scroll skips) with a genuine wedge: no-install browser suite vs. a Windows binary and a CPS-only site. Durable search intent, but no network effect.

Improvement areas

Contrast failure on secondary text and list descriptions — the exact copy that explains results is the hardest to read.
Thin security posture: 3/12 header checklist points, no CSP, HSTS, DMARC, security page or published audit.
Primary CTA understated; the double-click test deserves prominence over the secondary 'Download report' action.
Long, repetitive lower page with weak hierarchy across many similar-looking sections.

Design & Usability

Mouse Test Lab knows exactly what it is and puts it first: the interactive mouse diagram sits directly under the H1, so you're pressing buttons before you've read a word of marketing. The engineering-grid motif, navy palette and consistent iconography make it read as a working instrument rather than a brochure, and the 0/7 checklist plus the red/amber/green click-gap scale give instant, legible feedback. Usability is the strongest part of the product: no signup, no install, no account, and a 19-tool index plus 'On this page' chips for anyone who came for one specific test. The friction is in the details — secondary text is small and pale, the lower half is a long run of similar-looking sections, and the primary 'Run the double click test' CTA is understated next to a secondary download button.

Speed & Security

Speed is close to ideal for a diagnostic tool. Lighthouse measured 99/100 on mobile (LCP 906ms, TBT 34ms, CLS 0.068) and a clean 100/100 on desktop — a lightweight static page that loads before you've decided to test anything. Security is the weak flank. HTTPS is enforced and the site claims all processing stays on your device, which is the right architecture for a tool that reads raw mouse events. But the header probe scored 3/12: no HSTS, no Content-Security-Policy, no frame protection, no Referrer-Policy, no Permissions-Policy, and DMARC is missing. There's no security page, no published audit and no bug bounty. For a free client-side tool that's not alarming, but it's clearly behind what a security-conscious visitor would like to see.

Accessibility & Growth

Accessibility lands at 79: Lighthouse scored 97/100 with exactly one failing audit — insufficient contrast — and the independent visual audit flagged the same thing, tiny pale-grey secondary text. That's a real, fixable flaw rather than a missing certificate. Keyboard navigation and responsive layout look fine, but there's no accessibility statement, no WCAG claim and no multi-language support. Growth is a judgement on the idea: the problem is real and specific (double-click bounce, dead side buttons, skipping scroll wheels, used-mouse verification), and the wedge against the listed alternatives is genuine — MouseTester needs a Windows install, ClickSpeedTest only does CPS, KeyboardTester is a generic key checker. A no-install browser suite covering buttons, scroll, CPS, polling rate and DPI is a better fit for the search query. The limit is structural: free, no account, no reason to return until something breaks, so growth depends on search rankings rather than any compounding advantage.

Conclusion

What makes Mouse Test Lab worth keeping is that it respects the visitor's time and intelligence. It doesn't ask for an email to tell you your left button double-clicks. It doesn't install a driver to measure polling rate. It puts the instrument in front of you and explains what the readings mean, including the honest caveat that Firefox and Safari group events per frame and will read lower Hz than Chrome and Edge. That kind of transparency is rare and it's the reason the tool earns trust. The next step is polish rather than reinvention: bump the contrast on secondary text, promote the double-click test to a real primary button, add HSTS and a CSP, and publish a short accessibility statement. Do that and there's very little left to criticize.

Suggestions for improvement

Fix the contrast failure: darken the pale-grey secondary text and list descriptions to meet WCAG AA at their current size.
Promote 'Run the double click test' to a real primary CTA instead of a small secondary button beside 'Download report'.
Add HSTS, a Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy and DMARC — cheap wins on the header probe.
Break up the long lower half with clearer section hierarchy; several similar-looking blocks blur together on scroll.

How we score

Alternatives comparison

Named competitors, point by point. Nobody paid to appear here or to be left out.

	Mouse Test Lab	MouseTester	ClickSpeedTest	Keyboard Tester
Installation required	None — runs in the browser	Windows executable download	None — web-based	None — web-based
Button and scroll-wheel diagnostics	All 5 buttons + both scroll directions, with double-click bounce flagging	Polling rate, DPI and click latency graphs; not a button-by-button check	Click speed only	Keyboard keys and basic mouse buttons
Polling rate measurement	Up to 8000 Hz in Chrome/Edge via raw events; lower in Firefox/Safari	Yes — core feature, with detailed graphs	No	No
CPS and click-speed testing	CPS 1–300s, jitter, butterfly, drag, Kohi, 10-second and world-record pages	Click latency, not CPS benchmarking	Core feature with game modes and leaderboards	No
Sign-up or account required	No	No	No	No