Page views
15
7d
▲ 36% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
1.48 s
93% good · 15 samples
▼ 6% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
282 ms
40% good · 5 samples
▲ 56% vs previous 7d
CLS · p75
0.02
100% good · 15 samples
▼ 80% vs previous 7d
FCP · p75
1.38 s
93% good · 15 samples
▲ 18% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
834 ms
73% good · 15 samples
▲ 22% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
73%
13% unhappy · 15 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 15 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 | 8 | 1.47 s | 282 ms | 0.00 |
| Desktop | 5 | 2.17 s | – | 0.03 |
| Tablet | 2 | 966 ms | – | 0.00 |
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 | 14 | 1.93 | 24.4 s | 62% |
| Poor | 1 | 0.00 | 24.0 s | 49% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 72 ms | 541 ms | ▲ 656% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 20 ms | 107 ms | ▲ 426% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 19 ms | 83 ms | ▲ 345% |
| p75 CLS | 0.08 | 0.02 | ▼ 80% |
| p75 INP · Processing | 81 ms | 127 ms | ▲ 56% |
| p75 INP · Presentation | 54 ms | 85 ms | ▲ 56% |
| p75 INP | 181 ms | 282 ms | ▲ 56% |
| p75 INP · Input delay | 45 ms | 71 ms | ▲ 56% |
| p75 TTFB | 682 ms | 834 ms | ▲ 22% |
| p75 FCP | 1.16 s | 1.38 s | ▲ 18% |
| Avg engaged time | 27.9 s | 24.4 s | ▼ 13% |
| p75 HTML download | 92 ms | 102 ms | ▲ 11% |