Page views
8
7d
▲ 100% vs previous 7d
LCP · p75
1.68 s
100% good · 8 samples
▼ 19% vs previous 7d
INP · p75
161 ms
100% good · 3 samples
CLS · p75
0.00
100% good · 8 samples
▼ 100% vs previous 7d
FCP · p75
1.42 s
88% good · 8 samples
▼ 5% vs previous 7d
TTFB · p75
714 ms
75% good · 8 samples
▼ 17% vs previous 7d
Happy page views
100%
0% unhappy · 8 rated
13% 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 8 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 | 32 | 2.04 s | 227 ms | 0.03 |
| Desktop | 15 | 1.71 s | 102 ms | 0.02 |
| Tablet | 8 | 1.68 s | 161 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 | 8 | 1.38 | 52.9 s | 51% |
Biggest changes vs previous 7d
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 CLS | 0.03 | 0.00 | ▼ 100% |
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 361 ms | 46 ms | ▼ 87% |
| p75 LCP · Load delay | 1.69 s | 511 ms | ▼ 70% |
| Avg engaged time | 32.0 s | 52.9 s | ▲ 65% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 46 ms | 69 ms | ▲ 49% |
| p75 LCP · Load time | 869 ms | 540 ms | ▼ 38% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 39 ms | 49 ms | ▲ 26% |
| p75 TTFB · Server wait | 778 ms | 599 ms | ▼ 23% |
| p75 LCP | 2.08 s | 1.68 s | ▼ 19% |
| p75 TTFB | 863 ms | 714 ms | ▼ 17% |
| p75 FCP | 1.49 s | 1.42 s | ▼ 5% |
| Avg scroll depth | 53% | 51% | ▼ 4% |