Page views
12
7d
▼ 45% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
1.57 s
92% good · 12 samples
▼ 32% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
189 ms
75% good · 8 samples
▼ 39% vs previous 7d
CLS · p75
0.05
92% good · 12 samples
▼ 49% vs previous 7d
FCP · p75
1.31 s
83% good · 12 samples
▼ 27% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
684 ms
83% good · 12 samples
▼ 32% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
67%
0% unhappy · 12 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 12 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 | 10 | 1.70 s | 204 ms | 0.07 |
| Desktop | 2 | 790 ms | 132 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 | 11 | 1.27 | 15.6 s | 62% |
| Needs improvement | 1 | 2.00 | 55.8 s | 100% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 TTFB · Redirect & other | 0 ms | 27 ms | ▲ 203199993% |
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 410 ms | 206 ms | ▼ 50% |
| p75 CLS | 0.09 | 0.05 | ▼ 49% |
| p75 LCP · Load time | 874 ms | 456 ms | ▼ 48% |
| Avg engaged time | 31.2 s | 18.9 s | ▼ 39% |
| p75 INP | 309 ms | 189 ms | ▼ 39% |
| p75 INP · Input delay | 77 ms | 47 ms | ▼ 39% |
| p75 INP · Presentation | 93 ms | 57 ms | ▼ 39% |
| p75 INP · Processing | 139 ms | 85 ms | ▼ 39% |
| p75 TTFB · Server wait | 810 ms | 520 ms | ▼ 36% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 111 ms | 75 ms | ▼ 33% |
| p75 TTFB | 1.00 s | 684 ms | ▼ 32% |