Scan comparison
Green: scan A is better than scan B, red: scan A is worse. The change is always scan A − scan B.
vs.
-9
Filmstrip comparison
Scan A
00:00
85
FCP
LCP
Finished
Scan B
21:00
94
FCP
LCP
Finished
FCP
320 ms
vs.
412 ms
−92 ms
LCP
320 ms
vs.
412 ms
−92 ms
Finished
992 ms
vs.
969 ms
+23 ms
Score
85
vs.
94
-9
Scores
| Category | Scan A | Change | Scan B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 85 | -9 | 94 |
| Speed | 70 | -22 | 92 |
| Images | 93 | 0 | 93 |
| Caching | 91 | 0 | 91 |
| WordPress | 100 | 0 | 100 |
| Technical | 100 | 0 | 100 |
Core metrics
Lab values from the Mobile profile (390 px). TTFB is measured by the check server and applies to both profiles.
| Metric | Scan A | Change | Scan B |
|---|---|---|---|
| TTFB i | 1.4 s Needs improvement | +789 ms | 613 ms Good |
| FCP i | 292 ms Good | −244 ms | 536 ms Good |
| LCP i | 292 ms Good | −244 ms | 536 ms Good |
| CLS i | 0 Good | ≈ 0 | 0 Good |
| TBT i | 0 ms Good | ≈ 0 | 0 ms Good |
| Requests i | 6 Good | ≈ 0 | 6 Good |
| Data volume i | 47.4 KB | ≈ 0 | 47.4 KB |
Page build timing
Navigation timing from the real page load in the browser.
Desktop (1440 px)
| Phase | Scan A | Change | Scan B |
|---|---|---|---|
| DNS | 5 ms | ≈ 0 | 13 ms |
| TCP connection | 20 ms | ≈ 0 | 15 ms |
| TTFB | 113 ms | ≈ 0 | 127 ms |
| Transfer | 3 ms | ≈ 0 | 5 ms |
| DOM loaded | 292 ms | −21 ms | 313 ms |
| Page loaded | 324 ms | ≈ 0 | 336 ms |
Mobile (390 px)
| Phase | Scan A | Change | Scan B |
|---|---|---|---|
| DNS | 20 ms | ≈ 0 | 9 ms |
| TCP connection | 18 ms | ≈ 0 | 26 ms |
| TTFB | 147 ms | −176 ms | 323 ms |
| Transfer | 2 ms | ≈ 0 | 5 ms |
| DOM loaded | 279 ms | −236 ms | 515 ms |
| Page loaded | 299 ms | −249 ms | 548 ms |
Comparison of problems
Problems and warnings compared between the two scans (warnings and errors only).
New problems in scan A (1)
Server responds slowly
The server response takes around 1.4 s. That slows down page rendering very early on.
Fixed since scan B (1)
Server response can be improved
The server response takes around 613 ms.
Unchanged (2)
Lazy loading is not clearly detectable
Images were detected, but no loading="lazy" on any image element.
No modern image formats detected
No WebP or AVIF image files were detected in the HTML image sources.
Deductions by category
Which individual points influence the score the most.
| Scan A | Label | Scan B |
|---|---|---|
| Speed | ||
| −30 pts | High TTFB (Server response approx. 1.4 s) | — |
| — | Slightly elevated TTFB (Server response approx. 613 ms) | −8 pts |
| Images | ||
| −3 pts | No clear lazy loading (No lazy loading indicators found) | −3 pts |
| −4 pts | No modern image formats (No WebP/AVIF detected) | −4 pts |
| Caching | ||
| −5 pts | Caching partly disabled (no-cache, private) | −5 pts |
| −4 pts | No clear page cache indicator (No HIT/Age indicators detected) | −4 pts |