Page views
9
7d
▲ 125% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
1.93 s
78% good · 9 samples
▼ 32% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
105 ms
83% good · 6 samples
▼ 73% vs previous 7d
CLS · p75
0.00
89% good · 9 samples
FCP · p75
1.57 s
78% good · 9 samples
▼ 34% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
817 ms
67% good · 9 samples
▼ 47% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
67%
22% unhappy · 9 rated
11% 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 9 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 | 37 | 2.21 s | 344 ms | 0.04 |
| Desktop | 24 | 1.17 s | 163 ms | 0.01 |
| Tablet | 9 | 1.93 s | 105 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 | 7 | 0.86 | 28.0 s | 57% |
| Poor | 2 | 1.00 | 12.6 s | 41% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 30 ms | 75 ms | ▲ 152% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 25 ms | 55 ms | ▲ 121% |
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 794 ms | 44 ms | ▼ 94% |
| p75 INP · Processing | 176 ms | 47 ms | ▼ 73% |
| p75 INP · Presentation | 118 ms | 32 ms | ▼ 73% |
| p75 INP | 392 ms | 105 ms | ▼ 73% |
| p75 INP · Input delay | 98 ms | 26 ms | ▼ 73% |
| p75 TTFB | 1.53 s | 817 ms | ▼ 47% |
| p75 TTFB · Server wait | 1.53 s | 817 ms | ▼ 47% |
| p75 FCP | 2.38 s | 1.57 s | ▼ 34% |
| p75 LCP · Load delay | 595 ms | 785 ms | ▲ 32% |
| p75 LCP | 2.82 s | 1.93 s | ▼ 32% |