Tools & Wizards About Us
risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de screenshot

Report Summary

  • 17

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    32% of other websites

  • 86

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 61% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    94% of websites

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

Risikolebensversicherungs-Vergleich: Großer Anbieter-Check | FOCUS.de

Page Load Speed

3.8 sec in total

First Response

220 ms

Resources Loaded

3.3 sec

Page Rendered

360 ms

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Risikolebensversicherung Vergleich FOCUS content for Germany. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

Mit dem Risikolebensversicherungs-Vergleich von FOCUS Online und finanzen.de stellen Sie die Kosten und Leistungen der 80 Top-Versicherer gegenüber. ✓ Kostenlos & unverbindlich ✓ 100% transparent ▶ Fi...

Visit risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

Key Findings

We analyzed Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de page load time and found that the first response time was 220 ms and then it took 3.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 60% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de performance score

17

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.6 s

13/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value4.7 s

33/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value20.0 s

0/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value25,450 ms

0/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.24

52/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value35.9 s

0/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

220 ms

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich

664 ms

fol.min1.css

623 ms

fol.min2.css

535 ms

fol.min3.css

641 ms

Our browser made a total of 82 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 1% of them (1 request) were addressed to the original Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de, 18% (15 requests) were made to Imagesrv.adition.com and 15% (12 requests) were made to Focus.de. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (940 ms) relates to the external source Focus.de.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 1.7 MB (60%)

Content Size

2.8 MB

After Optimization

1.1 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de main page is 2.8 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. 55% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 1.7 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-73%

Potential reduce by 93.5 kB

  • Original 128.4 kB
  • After minification 119.4 kB
  • After compression 34.9 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 93.5 kB or 73% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-18%

Potential reduce by 96.2 kB

  • Original 532.0 kB
  • After minification 435.7 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. Obviously, Risikolebensversicherung Vergleich FOCUS needs image optimization as it can save up to 96.2 kB or 18% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-67%

Potential reduce by 1.1 MB

  • Original 1.7 MB
  • After minification 1.7 MB
  • After compression 577.6 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 1.1 MB or 67% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-84%

Potential reduce by 346.8 kB

  • Original 413.6 kB
  • After minification 406.1 kB
  • After compression 66.8 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. Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 346.8 kB or 84% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 51 (65%)

Requests Now

79

After Optimization

28

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 79 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Risikolebensversicherung Vergleich FOCUS. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 37 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 4 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

220 ms

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich

664 ms

fol.min1.css

fol.min1.css

623 ms

fol.min2.css

fol.min2.css

535 ms

fol.min3.css

fol.min3.css

641 ms

fol.min.js

fol.min.js

940 ms

amzn_ads.js

amzn_ads.js

6 ms

90675872.js

90675872.js

14 ms

iam.js

iam.js

438 ms

style.css

style.css

334 ms

fol_tfm_container.js

fol_tfm_container.js

9 ms

js_ng_fol_gpt.js

js_ng_fol_gpt.js

16 ms

27612,27613,27614,90649,90650,90647,90648,129346,27615

27612,27613,27614,90649,90650,90647,90648,129346,27615

101 ms

pql

pql

17 ms

gw.js

gw.js

191 ms

controltag

controltag

43 ms

gpt.js

gpt.js

16 ms

ae_ks.js

ae_ks.js

203 ms

controltag.js.e0ce6829d34e23edb3c90f3615dd81e0

controltag.js.e0ce6829d34e23edb3c90f3615dd81e0

61 ms

pubads_impl_82.js

pubads_impl_82.js

55 ms

container.html

container.html

24 ms

fol_queue.js

fol_queue.js

142 ms

_.gif

_.gif

11 ms

gtm.js

gtm.js

15 ms

448194792.js

448194792.js

226 ms

default.js

default.js

164 ms

tx.io

tx.io

216 ms

layoutComponents24.png

layoutComponents24.png

768 ms

header-bg.png

header-bg.png

104 ms

gradientComponentsX.png

gradientComponentsX.png

107 ms

gtm.js

gtm.js

15 ms

home.png

home.png

109 ms

feedback.png

feedback.png

197 ms

ads

ads

285 ms

gtm.js

gtm.js

16 ms

analytics.js

analytics.js

15 ms

plugin.js

plugin.js

30 ms

linkid.js

linkid.js

8 ms

p.min.js

p.min.js

19 ms

collect

collect

32 ms

collect

collect

56 ms

tx.io

tx.io

97 ms

data

data

351 ms

dotline.gif

dotline.gif

196 ms

arrow_right_17.gif

arrow_right_17.gif

195 ms

adition.js

adition.js

269 ms

js

js

173 ms

osd.js

osd.js

7 ms

adex.js

adex.js

254 ms

adrtxtag.min.js

adrtxtag.min.js

165 ms

banner

banner

174 ms

uid.html

uid.html

88 ms

2.gif

2.gif

87 ms

index.html

index.html

254 ms

jload

jload

51 ms

gradientComponentsY.png

gradientComponentsY.png

101 ms

logos_bg.jpg

logos_bg.jpg

531 ms

logo.png

logo.png

219 ms

claim.png

claim.png

221 ms

trust-seal.png

trust-seal.png

345 ms

tv-logos.png

tv-logos.png

345 ms

bg_rlv.jpg

bg_rlv.jpg

549 ms

haeckchen.png

haeckchen.png

441 ms

trenner.png

trenner.png

441 ms

fdeam.nocache.js

fdeam.nocache.js

320 ms

mon

mon

19 ms

AditionH5_ClickTags.js

AditionH5_ClickTags.js

169 ms

dt

dt

32 ms

icons.png

icons.png

134 ms

headline.png

headline.png

134 ms

glow.png

glow.png

179 ms

CTA.png

CTA.png

183 ms

blitz.png

blitz.png

258 ms

produkt3.jpg

produkt3.jpg

184 ms

produkt2.jpg

produkt2.jpg

182 ms

produkt.jpg

produkt.jpg

188 ms

logo.png

logo.png

255 ms

sub.png

sub.png

272 ms

bg.jpg

bg.jpg

276 ms

7DE46A8CD8C0336625E4A34DF7FAF158.cache.js

7DE46A8CD8C0336625E4A34DF7FAF158.cache.js

322 ms

ga.js

ga.js

62 ms

__utm.gif

__utm.gif

23 ms

Accessibility Review

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de accessibility score

86

Accessibility Issues

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.

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

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

High

Form elements do not have associated labels

High

Links do not have a discernible name

Best Practices

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de 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

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

High

Browser errors were logged to the console

High

Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript

SEO Factors

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de 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

    DE

  • Language Claimed

    DE

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that German is used on the page, and it matches the claimed language. Our system also found out that Risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de 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

risikolebensversicherung-vergleich.focus.de

Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Risikolebensversicherung Vergleich FOCUS. Lack of Open Graph description can be counter-productive for their social media presence, as such a description allows converting a website homepage (or other pages) into good-looking, rich and well-structured posts, when it is being shared on Facebook and other social media. For example, adding the following code snippet into HTML <head> tag will help to represent this web page correctly in social networks: