Tools & Wizards About Us
charmingweb.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 56

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    72% of other websites

  • 95

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 86% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    80% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    94% of websites

charmingweb.com

Web Design Portfolio - Charming Web Design and Hosting

Page Load Speed

2.9 sec in total

First Response

222 ms

Resources Loaded

2.4 sec

Page Rendered

216 ms

charmingweb.com screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Charming Web content. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about charmingweb.com

Web design and hosting

Visit charmingweb.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Charmingweb.com page load time and found that the first response time was 222 ms and then it took 2.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 50% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

charmingweb.com performance score

56

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.5 s

15/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value7.1 s

5/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value7.6 s

25/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value40 ms

100/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value6.7 s

56/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

charmingweb.com

222 ms

charmingweb.com

1566 ms

main.min.css

197 ms

elementor-icons.min.css

199 ms

frontend-lite.min.css

395 ms

Our browser made a total of 29 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 93% of them (27 requests) were addressed to the original Charmingweb.com, 3% (1 request) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com and 3% (1 request) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.6 sec) belongs to the original domain Charmingweb.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 494.2 kB (38%)

Content Size

1.3 MB

After Optimization

806.6 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Charmingweb.com main page is 1.3 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. 30% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 658.6 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 100.8 kB

  • Original 121.3 kB
  • After minification 119.1 kB
  • After compression 20.4 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. HTML code on this page is well minified. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 100.8 kB or 83% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 1.6 kB

  • Original 658.6 kB
  • After minification 657.0 kB

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. Charming Web images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-68%

Potential reduce by 198.6 kB

  • Original 292.4 kB
  • After minification 292.4 kB
  • After compression 93.8 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 198.6 kB or 68% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-85%

Potential reduce by 193.2 kB

  • Original 228.6 kB
  • After minification 227.6 kB
  • After compression 35.3 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. Charmingweb.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 193.2 kB or 85% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 19 (70%)

Requests Now

27

After Optimization

8

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 27 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Charming Web. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 12 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 9 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

charmingweb.com

charmingweb.com

222 ms

charmingweb.com

charmingweb.com

1566 ms

main.min.css

main.min.css

197 ms

elementor-icons.min.css

elementor-icons.min.css

199 ms

frontend-lite.min.css

frontend-lite.min.css

395 ms

swiper.min.css

swiper.min.css

275 ms

post-598.css

post-598.css

205 ms

post-626.css

post-626.css

215 ms

general.min.css

general.min.css

212 ms

css

css

32 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

339 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

276 ms

animations.min.css

animations.min.css

230 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

301 ms

general.min.js

general.min.js

289 ms

webpack.runtime.min.js

webpack.runtime.min.js

294 ms

frontend-modules.min.js

frontend-modules.min.js

415 ms

waypoints.min.js

waypoints.min.js

415 ms

core.min.js

core.min.js

416 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

433 ms

underscore.min.js

underscore.min.js

417 ms

wp-util.min.js

wp-util.min.js

417 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

426 ms

cropped-cw-logo-tiny.png

cropped-cw-logo-tiny.png

85 ms

art-crime-studios.png

art-crime-studios.png

272 ms

dr-franklin-rose-blog-1024x488.jpg

dr-franklin-rose-blog-1024x488.jpg

153 ms

houston-piano-tuner-1024x487.png

houston-piano-tuner-1024x487.png

184 ms

silhouettesforsurvivors.org_-1024x485.png

silhouettesforsurvivors.org_-1024x485.png

202 ms

font

font

30 ms

Accessibility Review

charmingweb.com accessibility score

95

Accessibility Issues

Navigation

These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.

Impact

Issue

High

Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order

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

Links do not have a discernible name

Best Practices

charmingweb.com best practices score

92

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

SEO Factors

charmingweb.com SEO score

100

Search Engine Optimization Advices

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

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 Charmingweb.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 Charmingweb.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

charmingweb.com

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