Page views
2
24h
▼ 80% vs previous 24h
LCP · p75
2.83 s
50% good · 2 samples
▲ 79% vs previous 24h
INP · p75
100 ms
100% good · 1 samples
▼ 2% vs previous 24h
CLS · p75
0.00
100% good · 2 samples
FCP · p75
2.80 s
50% good · 2 samples
▲ 116% vs previous 24h
TTFB · p75
1.50 s
0% good · 2 samples
▲ 124% vs previous 24h
Happy page views
50%
0% unhappy · 2 rated
50% 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 2 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 | 1 | 1.68 s | – | 0.00 |
| Desktop | 1 | 3.21 s | 100 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 | 1 | 0.00 | 171.3 s | 86% |
| Needs improvement | 1 | 0.00 | 13.5 s | 66% |
Biggest changes vs previous 24h
| Measure | Previous | Now | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| p75 LCP · Render delay | 50 ms | 1.17 s | ▲ 2246% |
| p75 TTFB · TLS | 46 ms | 186 ms | ▲ 302% |
| Avg engaged time | 34.7 s | 92.4 s | ▲ 167% |
| p75 TTFB · Connect | 49 ms | 131 ms | ▲ 165% |
| p75 TTFB · Server wait | 475 ms | 1.18 s | ▲ 148% |
| p75 TTFB | 667 ms | 1.50 s | ▲ 124% |
| p75 FCP | 1.30 s | 2.80 s | ▲ 116% |
| p75 LCP | 1.58 s | 2.83 s | ▲ 79% |
| p75 HTML download | 98 ms | 149 ms | ▲ 52% |
| p75 LCP · Load time | 384 ms | 250 ms | ▼ 35% |
| p75 LCP · Load delay | 486 ms | 385 ms | ▼ 21% |
| Avg scroll depth | 65% | 76% | ▲ 17% |