Tools & Wizards About Us
immaculatehousekeeping.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 27

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    46% of other websites

  • 70

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 35% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 86

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    60% of websites

immaculatehousekeeping.com

Immaculate Housekeeping

Page Load Speed

2.5 sec in total

First Response

178 ms

Resources Loaded

2 sec

Page Rendered

294 ms

immaculatehousekeeping.com screenshot

About Website

Welcome to immaculatehousekeeping.com homepage info - get ready to check Immaculate Housekeeping best content right away, or after learning these important things about immaculatehousekeeping.com

Immaculate Housekeeping, LLC specializes in Cleaning Services, Janitorial Services and Commercial Cleaning Services and services Seattle and Bellevue. (206) 512-6231

Visit immaculatehousekeeping.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Immaculatehousekeeping.com page load time and found that the first response time was 178 ms and then it took 2.3 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 45% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

immaculatehousekeeping.com performance score

27

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value3.1 s

47/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value9.4 s

0/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value6.6 s

38/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value950 ms

29/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.324

35/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value7.5 s

47/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

immaculatehousekeeping.com

178 ms

immaculatehousekeeping.com

505 ms

css

82 ms

lightbox.min.css

106 ms

normalize.min.css

165 ms

Our browser made a total of 45 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 80% of them (36 requests) were addressed to the original Immaculatehousekeeping.com, 9% (4 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 4% (2 requests) were made to Google-analytics.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (833 ms) belongs to the original domain Immaculatehousekeeping.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 47.4 kB (2%)

Content Size

2.2 MB

After Optimization

2.2 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Immaculatehousekeeping.com main page is 2.2 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 2.0 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-77%

Potential reduce by 24.8 kB

  • Original 32.0 kB
  • After minification 30.3 kB
  • After compression 7.2 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 24.8 kB or 77% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 2.5 kB

  • Original 2.0 MB
  • After minification 2.0 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. Immaculate Housekeeping images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-9%

Potential reduce by 11.1 kB

  • Original 120.1 kB
  • After minification 120.1 kB
  • After compression 109.0 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. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.

CSS Optimization

-20%

Potential reduce by 8.9 kB

  • Original 45.4 kB
  • After minification 45.4 kB
  • After compression 36.4 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. Immaculatehousekeeping.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 8.9 kB or 20% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 23 (62%)

Requests Now

37

After Optimization

14

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 37 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Immaculate Housekeeping. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 15 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 10 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

immaculatehousekeeping.com

immaculatehousekeeping.com

178 ms

immaculatehousekeeping.com

immaculatehousekeeping.com

505 ms

css

css

82 ms

lightbox.min.css

lightbox.min.css

106 ms

normalize.min.css

normalize.min.css

165 ms

foundation.css

foundation.css

211 ms

style.css

style.css

162 ms

font-awesome.min.css

font-awesome.min.css

247 ms

slick.css

slick.css

258 ms

page-css.php

page-css.php

389 ms

site-reviews.css

site-reviews.css

273 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

276 ms

polyfill.js

polyfill.js

435 ms

jquery.datetimepicker.css

jquery.datetimepicker.css

283 ms

wp-lightbox-2.min.js

wp-lightbox-2.min.js

354 ms

foundation.js

foundation.js

314 ms

foundation.topbar.js

foundation.topbar.js

367 ms

foundation.equalizer.js

foundation.equalizer.js

419 ms

modernizr.js

modernizr.js

479 ms

lnm-scripts.min.js

lnm-scripts.min.js

546 ms

comment-reply.min.js

comment-reply.min.js

477 ms

slick.js

slick.js

546 ms

jquery.datetimepicker.full.min.js

jquery.datetimepicker.full.min.js

705 ms

jquery.validationEngine-en.js

jquery.validationEngine-en.js

544 ms

jquery.validationEngine.js

jquery.validationEngine.js

545 ms

lnm-contactform.min.js

lnm-contactform.min.js

762 ms

analytics.js

analytics.js

123 ms

linknow-logo-white.png

linknow-logo-white.png

329 ms

logo.jpg

logo.jpg

331 ms

slider_1.jpg

slider_1.jpg

667 ms

slider_2.jpg

slider_2.jpg

407 ms

slider_3.jpg

slider_3.jpg

332 ms

reviews_white.png

reviews_white.png

330 ms

general-home-img-02.jpg

general-home-img-02.jpg

537 ms

general-home-img-03.jpg

general-home-img-03.jpg

443 ms

get_captcha.php

get_captcha.php

444 ms

refresh.png

refresh.png

469 ms

commercial-home-img-01.jpg

commercial-home-img-01.jpg

833 ms

collect

collect

78 ms

flU8Rqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN5fzXeBzCh40.woff

flU8Rqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN5fzXeBzCh40.woff

76 ms

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59Yf_NeKBUet5Hg.woff

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59Yf_NeKBUet5Hg.woff

323 ms

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59IePNeKBUet5Hg.woff

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59IePNeKBUet5Hg.woff

125 ms

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59wevNeKBUet5Hg.woff

flUhRqu5zY00QEpyWJYWN59wevNeKBUet5Hg.woff

379 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

491 ms

ajax-loader.gif

ajax-loader.gif

216 ms

Accessibility Review

immaculatehousekeeping.com accessibility score

70

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

Image elements do not have [alt] attributes

High

Links do not have a discernible name

Best Practices

immaculatehousekeeping.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

Serves images with low resolution

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

SEO Factors

immaculatehousekeeping.com SEO score

86

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Crawling and Indexing

To appear in search results, crawlers need access to your app.

Impact

Issue

High

Links are not crawlable

Content Best Practices

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

Impact

Issue

High

Image elements do not have [alt] attributes

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 Immaculatehousekeeping.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 Immaculatehousekeeping.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

immaculatehousekeeping.com

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