Tools & Wizards About Us
intimateimage.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 53

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    70% of other websites

  • 88

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 68% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    55% of websites

  • 93

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    83% of websites

intimateimage.com

Your shop in Los Angeles for Breast Prosthesis, Wigs, Bras, Post-mastectomy Clothes

Page Load Speed

1.7 sec in total

First Response

31 ms

Resources Loaded

1.4 sec

Page Rendered

262 ms

intimateimage.com screenshot

About Website

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

Here is where cancer survivors find functional, fashionable bras, breast prosthesis and many more items – Los Angeles' Favorite Intimate Apparel Shop.

Visit intimateimage.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Intimateimage.com page load time and found that the first response time was 31 ms and then it took 1.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 35% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

intimateimage.com performance score

53

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.5 s

67/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value7.6 s

4/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value3.3 s

91/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value380 ms

69/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.08

94/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value12.3 s

15/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

intimateimage.com

31 ms

intimateimage.com

36 ms

css

40 ms

mediaelementplayer-legacy.min.css

6 ms

wp-mediaelement.min.css

16 ms

Our browser made a total of 59 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 71% of them (42 requests) were addressed to the original Intimateimage.com, 7% (4 requests) were made to Reviews.webstyle.com and 7% (4 requests) were made to Maps.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (864 ms) relates to the external source Reviews.webstyle.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 188.5 kB (8%)

Content Size

2.4 MB

After Optimization

2.2 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Intimateimage.com main page is 2.4 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. 70% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 1.7 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-51%

Potential reduce by 170.4 kB

  • Original 337.0 kB
  • After minification 334.6 kB
  • After compression 166.7 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. 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 170.4 kB or 51% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 7.4 kB

  • Original 1.7 MB
  • After minification 1.7 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. Intimateimage images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 2.6 kB

  • Original 290.3 kB
  • After minification 290.3 kB
  • After compression 287.8 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. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.

CSS Optimization

-14%

Potential reduce by 8.2 kB

  • Original 60.6 kB
  • After minification 60.6 kB
  • After compression 52.4 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. Intimateimage.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 8.2 kB or 14% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 33 (62%)

Requests Now

53

After Optimization

20

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 53 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Intimateimage. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 21 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 14 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

intimateimage.com

intimateimage.com

31 ms

intimateimage.com

intimateimage.com

36 ms

css

css

40 ms

mediaelementplayer-legacy.min.css

mediaelementplayer-legacy.min.css

6 ms

wp-mediaelement.min.css

wp-mediaelement.min.css

16 ms

styles.css

styles.css

26 ms

slick.css

slick.css

21 ms

slick-slider-style.css

slick-slider-style.css

26 ms

form-basic.css

form-basic.css

21 ms

style.css

style.css

24 ms

layout.css

layout.css

22 ms

jetpack.css

jetpack.css

28 ms

prettyPhoto.css

prettyPhoto.css

29 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

30 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

29 ms

third-party.js

third-party.js

29 ms

modernizr.js

modernizr.js

31 ms

jquery.flexslider.min.js

jquery.flexslider.min.js

33 ms

jquery.prettyPhoto.js

jquery.prettyPhoto.js

34 ms

general.js

general.js

65 ms

swfobject.js

swfobject.js

67 ms

shortcodes.css

shortcodes.css

65 ms

custom.css

custom.css

66 ms

css

css

31 ms

submit.js

submit.js

82 ms

comment-reply.min.js

comment-reply.min.js

80 ms

slick.min.js

slick.min.js

81 ms

wpsisac-public.js

wpsisac-public.js

82 ms

e-202444.js

e-202444.js

18 ms

embed

embed

258 ms

siegel-original-150-150.png

siegel-original-150-150.png

333 ms

app.js

app.js

120 ms

analytics.js

analytics.js

78 ms

intimate-image-banner-logotype115x960.png

intimate-image-banner-logotype115x960.png

66 ms

intimate-image-interior08-1024x683.jpg

intimate-image-interior08-1024x683.jpg

71 ms

intimate-image-interior01-1024x683.jpg

intimate-image-interior01-1024x683.jpg

72 ms

intimate-image-interior08.jpg

intimate-image-interior08.jpg

72 ms

intimate-image-interior07.jpg

intimate-image-interior07.jpg

72 ms

intimate-image-interior06.jpg

intimate-image-interior06.jpg

70 ms

intimate-image-interior05.jpg

intimate-image-interior05.jpg

76 ms

intimate-image-interior04.jpg

intimate-image-interior04.jpg

96 ms

intimate-image-interior03.jpg

intimate-image-interior03.jpg

93 ms

intimate-image-interior02.jpg

intimate-image-interior02.jpg

93 ms

intimate-image-interior01.jpg

intimate-image-interior01.jpg

100 ms

woothemes.png

woothemes.png

91 ms

widget.js

widget.js

284 ms

arrow-left.png

arrow-left.png

42 ms

ajax-loader.gif

ajax-loader.gif

46 ms

arrow-right.png

arrow-right.png

46 ms

SlGVmQWMvZQIdix7AFxXkHNSaA.ttf

SlGVmQWMvZQIdix7AFxXkHNSaA.ttf

50 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

44 ms

collect

collect

21 ms

js

js

59 ms

js

js

31 ms

geometry.js

geometry.js

4 ms

search.js

search.js

8 ms

main.js

main.js

11 ms

siegel-original-150-150.png

siegel-original-150-150.png

466 ms

widget.js

widget.js

864 ms

Accessibility Review

intimateimage.com accessibility score

88

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

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

intimateimage.com best practices score

83

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

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

High

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

intimateimage.com SEO score

93

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

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 Intimateimage.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 Intimateimage.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

intimateimage.com

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