Page views
8
7d
▲ 300% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
2.02 s
75% good · 8 samples
▲ 117% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
192 ms
75% good · 4 samples
▼ 33% vs previous 7d
CLS · p75
0.00
100% good · 8 samples
FCP · p75
1.35 s
100% good · 8 samples
▲ 85% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
623 ms
75% good · 8 samples
▲ 58% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
63%
13% unhappy · 8 rated
25% of these page views were in-app (soft) navigations. Those report INP and CLS, but browsers only measure LCP, FCP and TTFB on full page loads, so those three cover fewer page views.
What to fix first
Nothing stands out for these filters: no page type, element or script has enough slow page views to call out.
Based on 8 page views. Findings need at least 5 measured page views each, so more show up as traffic grows (try the 30d range).
Trend
By device
| Device | Page views | p75 LCP | p75 INP | p75 CLS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile | 5 | 1.75 s | 125 ms | 0.00 |
| Tablet | 3 | 2.15 s | 286 ms | 0.01 |
Does speed cost engagement?
Page views grouped by their own LCP. If slower pages get fewer clicks and less reading, that's the cost of slowness.
| LCP | Page views | Clicks per view | Engaged time | Avg scroll |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good | 6 | 1.50 | 44.7 s | 77% |
| Needs improvement | 1 | 0.00 | 76.8 s | 67% |
| Poor | 1 | 0.00 | 12.9 s | 28% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 LCP · Load time | 433 ms | 1.57 s | ▲ 264% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 15 ms | 51 ms | ▲ 240% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 24 ms | 67 ms | ▲ 179% |
| p75 LCP · Load delay | 172 ms | 466 ms | ▲ 171% |
| p75 LCP | 934 ms | 2.02 s | ▲ 117% |
| p75 FCP | 727 ms | 1.35 s | ▲ 85% |
| p75 HTML download | 69 ms | 122 ms | ▲ 78% |
| Avg engaged time | 27.1 s | 44.7 s | ▲ 65% |
| p75 TTFB | 393 ms | 623 ms | ▲ 58% |
| Avg scroll depth | 49% | 70% | ▲ 43% |
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 226 ms | 131 ms | ▼ 42% |
| p75 INP | 288 ms | 192 ms | ▼ 33% |