Page views
4
7d
± 0% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
1.02 s
100% good · 4 samples
▼ 59% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
32 ms
100% good · 1 samples
▼ 22% vs previous 7d
CLS · p75
0.03
75% good · 4 samples
▼ 4% vs previous 7d
FCP · p75
771 ms
100% good · 4 samples
▼ 51% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
419 ms
100% good · 4 samples
▼ 60% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
75%
0% unhappy · 4 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 4 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 | 829 ms | – | 0.00 |
| Desktop | 2 | 1.26 s | 32 ms | 0.08 |
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 | 1.50 | 53.9 s | 65% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg engaged time | 15.3 s | 53.9 s | ▲ 253% |
| p75 LCP · Load delay | 1.49 s | 268 ms | ▼ 82% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 140 ms | 53 ms | ▼ 62% |
| p75 TTFB · Server wait | 844 ms | 331 ms | ▼ 61% |
| p75 TTFB | 1.06 s | 419 ms | ▼ 60% |
| p75 LCP | 2.46 s | 1.02 s | ▼ 59% |
| p75 FCP | 1.57 s | 771 ms | ▼ 51% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 72 ms | 47 ms | ▼ 35% |
| p75 HTML download | 136 ms | 96 ms | ▼ 29% |
| Avg scroll depth | 51% | 64% | ▲ 26% |
| p75 LCP · Load time | 527 ms | 460 ms | ▼ 13% |