Tools & Wizards About Us

Report Summary

  • 37

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    56% of other websites

  • 80

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 49% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 86

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    60% of websites

riopack.com

Rotogravure & Offset Printing Specialist since 1926

Page Load Speed

5.5 sec in total

First Response

316 ms

Resources Loaded

4.7 sec

Page Rendered

548 ms

About Website

Click here to check amazing Riopack content. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about riopack.com

Riopack Company: Rotogravure printing, cutting, converting paper films of all kinds, rolls, sheets, printing/lining of paper, aluminum, and film

Visit riopack.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Riopack.com page load time and found that the first response time was 316 ms and then it took 5.2 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 75% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

riopack.com performance score

37

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.2 s

19/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value4.2 s

44/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value10.3 s

8/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value400 ms

67/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.489

17/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value14.5 s

9/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

riopack.com

316 ms

riopack.com

1274 ms

bootstrap.css

278 ms

font-awesome.css

383 ms

ionicon.css

477 ms

Our browser made a total of 84 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 94% of them (79 requests) were addressed to the original Riopack.com, 5% (4 requests) were made to Maps.googleapis.com and 1% (1 request) were made to Google.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.7 sec) belongs to the original domain Riopack.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 754.3 kB (24%)

Content Size

3.1 MB

After Optimization

2.4 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Riopack.com main page is 3.1 MB. This result falls beyond the top 1M of websites and identifies a large and not optimized web page that may take ages to load. 50% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 2.5 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-93%

Potential reduce by 88.7 kB

  • Original 95.4 kB
  • After minification 81.9 kB
  • After compression 6.7 kB

HTML content can be minified and compressed by a website’s server. The most efficient way is to compress content using GZIP which reduces data amount travelling through the network between server and browser. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 13.5 kB, which is 14% of the original size. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 88.7 kB or 93% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-14%

Potential reduce by 342.1 kB

  • Original 2.5 MB
  • After minification 2.2 MB

Image size optimization can help to speed up a website loading time. The chart above shows the difference between the size before and after optimization. Obviously, Riopack needs image optimization as it can save up to 342.1 kB or 14% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-52%

Potential reduce by 158.6 kB

  • Original 306.9 kB
  • After minification 296.6 kB
  • After compression 148.3 kB

It’s better to minify JavaScript in order to improve website performance. The diagram shows the current total size of all JavaScript files against the prospective JavaScript size after its minification and compression. It is highly recommended that all JavaScript files should be compressed and minified as it can save up to 158.6 kB or 52% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 164.9 kB

  • Original 198.4 kB
  • After minification 165.9 kB
  • After compression 33.5 kB

CSS files minification is very important to reduce a web page rendering time. The faster CSS files can load, the earlier a page can be rendered. Riopack.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 164.9 kB or 83% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 17 (21%)

Requests Now

80

After Optimization

63

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 80 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Riopack. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 11 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 8 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

Accessibility Review

riopack.com accessibility score

80

Accessibility Issues

ARIA

These are opportunities to improve the usage of ARIA in your application which may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

[aria-hidden="true"] elements contain focusable descendents

Names and labels

These are opportunities to improve the semantics of the controls in your application. This may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

Buttons do not have an accessible name

High

<frame> or <iframe> elements do not have a title

Contrast

These are opportunities to improve the legibility of your content.

Impact

Issue

High

Background and foreground colors do not have a sufficient contrast ratio.

Navigation

These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.

Impact

Issue

High

Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order

Best practices

These items highlight common accessibility best practices.

Impact

Issue

High

[user-scalable="no"] is used in the <meta name="viewport"> element or the [maximum-scale] attribute is less than 5.

Best Practices

riopack.com best practices score

75

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

High

Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

User Experience

Impact

Issue

High

Displays images with incorrect aspect ratio

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

SEO Factors

riopack.com SEO score

86

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Content Best Practices

Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.

Impact

Issue

High

Links do not have descriptive text

Mobile Friendly

Make sure your pages are mobile friendly so users don’t have to pinch or zoom in order to read the content pages. [Learn more](https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/).

Impact

Issue

High

Document uses legible font sizes

High

Tap targets are not sized appropriately

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Riopack.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and it matches the claimed language. Our system also found out that Riopack.com main page’s claimed encoding is utf-8. Use of this encoding format is the best practice as the main page visitors from all over the world won’t have any issues with symbol transcription.

Social Sharing Optimization

Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Riopack. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: