Tools & Wizards About Us
gabigal.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 40

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    59% of other websites

  • 78

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 45% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    80% of websites

  • 93

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    83% of websites

gabigal.com

gabigal.com – Energy Alignment & Life Purpose Abundance

Page Load Speed

3.6 sec in total

First Response

639 ms

Resources Loaded

2.7 sec

Page Rendered

212 ms

gabigal.com screenshot

About Website

Visit gabigal.com now to see the best up-to-date Gabigal content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about gabigal.com

Visit gabigal.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Gabigal.com page load time and found that the first response time was 639 ms and then it took 2.9 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 55% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

gabigal.com performance score

40

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value6.3 s

3/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value15.0 s

0/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value10.9 s

6/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value320 ms

77/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value14.2 s

9/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

www.gabigal.com

639 ms

front-styles.css

415 ms

style.min.css

102 ms

style.css

615 ms

blossomthemes-toolkit-public.min.css

666 ms

Our browser made a total of 79 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 44% of them (35 requests) were addressed to the original Gabigal.com, 52% (41 requests) were made to Usercontent.one and 1% (1 request) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.4 sec) relates to the external source Usercontent.one.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 94.5 kB (6%)

Content Size

1.5 MB

After Optimization

1.4 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Gabigal.com main page is 1.5 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. 45% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 1.0 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-80%

Potential reduce by 82.4 kB

  • Original 103.4 kB
  • After minification 100.5 kB
  • After compression 20.9 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 82.4 kB or 80% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 1.1 kB

  • Original 289.5 kB
  • After minification 288.4 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. Gabigal images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 1.3 kB

  • Original 1.0 MB
  • After minification 1.0 MB
  • After compression 1.0 MB

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. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.

CSS Optimization

-8%

Potential reduce by 9.7 kB

  • Original 115.2 kB
  • After minification 115.2 kB
  • After compression 105.5 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. Gabigal.com has all CSS files already compressed.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 72 (94%)

Requests Now

77

After Optimization

5

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 77 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Gabigal. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 58 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 16 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

www.gabigal.com

www.gabigal.com

639 ms

front-styles.css

front-styles.css

415 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

102 ms

style.css

style.css

615 ms

blossomthemes-toolkit-public.min.css

blossomthemes-toolkit-public.min.css

666 ms

woocommerce-layout.css

woocommerce-layout.css

666 ms

woocommerce.css

woocommerce.css

668 ms

animate.min.css

animate.min.css

714 ms

style.css

style.css

825 ms

style.css

style.css

728 ms

woocommerce.min.css

woocommerce.min.css

749 ms

css

css

27 ms

owl.carousel.min.css

owl.carousel.min.css

753 ms

gutenberg.min.css

gutenberg.min.css

754 ms

mailin-front.css

mailin-front.css

812 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

202 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

255 ms

jquery.blockUI.min.js

jquery.blockUI.min.js

852 ms

add-to-cart.min.js

add-to-cart.min.js

853 ms

js.cookie.min.js

js.cookie.min.js

854 ms

woocommerce.min.js

woocommerce.min.js

855 ms

front.js

front.js

912 ms

mailin-front.js

mailin-front.js

923 ms

wc-blocks.css

wc-blocks.css

962 ms

isotope.pkgd.min.js

isotope.pkgd.min.js

914 ms

imagesloaded.min.js

imagesloaded.min.js

260 ms

masonry.min.js

masonry.min.js

260 ms

blossomthemes-toolkit-public.min.js

blossomthemes-toolkit-public.min.js

915 ms

all.min.js

all.min.js

1427 ms

v4-shims.min.js

v4-shims.min.js

1009 ms

index.js

index.js

998 ms

index.js

index.js

1083 ms

sourcebuster.min.js

sourcebuster.min.js

1022 ms

order-attribution.min.js

order-attribution.min.js

1024 ms

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

298 ms

regenerator-runtime.min.js

regenerator-runtime.min.js

299 ms

wp-polyfill.min.js

wp-polyfill.min.js

407 ms

react.min.js

react.min.js

336 ms

hooks.min.js

hooks.min.js

341 ms

deprecated.min.js

deprecated.min.js

342 ms

dom.min.js

dom.min.js

398 ms

react-dom.min.js

react-dom.min.js

501 ms

escape-html.min.js

escape-html.min.js

420 ms

element.min.js

element.min.js

427 ms

is-shallow-equal.min.js

is-shallow-equal.min.js

428 ms

i18n.min.js

i18n.min.js

497 ms

keycodes.min.js

keycodes.min.js

506 ms

priority-queue.min.js

priority-queue.min.js

504 ms

compose.min.js

compose.min.js

511 ms

private-apis.min.js

private-apis.min.js

512 ms

redux-routine.min.js

redux-routine.min.js

597 ms

data.min.js

data.min.js

600 ms

lodash.min.js

lodash.min.js

672 ms

wc-blocks-registry.js

wc-blocks-registry.js

1079 ms

url.min.js

url.min.js

616 ms

api-fetch.min.js

api-fetch.min.js

596 ms

wc-settings.js

wc-settings.js

1105 ms

data-controls.min.js

data-controls.min.js

595 ms

html-entities.min.js

html-entities.min.js

680 ms

notices.min.js

notices.min.js

680 ms

wc-blocks-middleware.js

wc-blocks-middleware.js

1116 ms

wc-blocks-data.js

wc-blocks-data.js

1222 ms

dom-ready.min.js

dom-ready.min.js

696 ms

a11y.min.js

a11y.min.js

700 ms

primitives.min.js

primitives.min.js

717 ms

warning.min.js

warning.min.js

756 ms

blocks-components.js

blocks-components.js

1245 ms

blocks-checkout.js

blocks-checkout.js

1163 ms

order-attribution-blocks.min.js

order-attribution-blocks.min.js

1204 ms

owl.carousel.min.js

owl.carousel.min.js

1216 ms

owlcarousel2-a11ylayer.min.js

owlcarousel2-a11ylayer.min.js

1248 ms

custom.min.js

custom.min.js

906 ms

modal-accessibility.min.js

modal-accessibility.min.js

705 ms

sa.js

sa.js

353 ms

spinner.gif

spinner.gif

106 ms

bare-logo-gabi-gal.png

bare-logo-gabi-gal.png

615 ms

gabi_pic.jpeg

gabi_pic.jpeg

615 ms

ga6iaw1J5X9T9RW6j9bNVls-hfgvz8JcMofYTa32J4wsL2JAlAhZqFCTx8cM.woff

ga6iaw1J5X9T9RW6j9bNVls-hfgvz8JcMofYTa32J4wsL2JAlAhZqFCTx8cM.woff

17 ms

woocommerce-smallscreen.css

woocommerce-smallscreen.css

101 ms

Accessibility Review

gabigal.com accessibility score

78

Accessibility Issues

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

Form elements do not have associated labels

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.

Best Practices

gabigal.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

High

Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript

SEO Factors

gabigal.com SEO score

93

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

    SV

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Gabigal.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and it does not match the claimed Swedish language. Our system also found out that Gabigal.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

gabigal.com

Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Gabigal. 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: