Page views
5
24h
▼ 86% vs previous 24h
LCP · p75
2.38 s
80% good · 5 samples
▼ 8% vs previous 24h
INP · p75
549 ms
67% good · 3 samples
▲ 78% vs previous 24h
CLS · p75
0.09
80% good · 5 samples
▲ 31% vs previous 24h
FCP · p75
2.35 s
60% good · 5 samples
▼ 9% vs previous 24h
TTFB · p75
1.25 s
40% good · 5 samples
▼ 4% vs previous 24h
Happy page views
80%
20% unhappy · 5 rated
20% 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 5 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 | 2 | 1.46 s | – | 0.07 |
| Desktop | 2 | 2.16 s | 109 ms | 0.01 |
| Tablet | 1 | 2.68 s | 986 ms | 0.18 |
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 | 4 | 1.75 | 31.3 s | 57% |
| Needs improvement | 1 | 1.00 | 7.6 s | 40% |
Biggest changes vs previous 24h
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 TTFB · DNS | 83 ms | 0 ms | ▼ 100% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 64 ms | 0 ms | ▼ 100% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 85 ms | 0 ms | ▼ 100% |
| p75 INP · Processing | 139 ms | 247 ms | ▲ 78% |
| p75 INP · Presentation | 93 ms | 165 ms | ▲ 78% |
| p75 INP | 309 ms | 549 ms | ▲ 78% |
| p75 INP · Input delay | 77 ms | 137 ms | ▲ 78% |
| p75 CLS | 0.07 | 0.09 | ▲ 31% |
| p75 FCP | 2.58 s | 2.35 s | ▼ 9% |
| p75 LCP | 2.60 s | 2.38 s | ▼ 8% |
| Avg engaged time | 27.8 s | 26.5 s | ▼ 4% |
| Avg scroll depth | 56% | 53% | ▼ 4% |