Report Summary

  • 21

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    39% of other websites

  • 80

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 50% of websites

  • 67

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    24% of websites

  • 98

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    92% of websites

jamesgrandstaff.com

James Grandstaff's Blog — James Grandstaff's Blog

Page Load Speed

5.9 sec in total

First Response

1.4 sec

Resources Loaded

3.9 sec

Page Rendered

571 ms

jamesgrandstaff.com screenshot

About Website

Visit jamesgrandstaff.com now to see the best up-to-date James Grandstaff content for United States and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about jamesgrandstaff.com

Digital Marketing Expert

Visit jamesgrandstaff.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Jamesgrandstaff.com page load time and found that the first response time was 1.4 sec and then it took 4.5 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 70% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

jamesgrandstaff.com performance score

21

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.8 s

11/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value6.6 s

8/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value11.6 s

4/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value1,060 ms

25/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.226

55/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value12.4 s

15/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

www.jamesgrandstaff.com

1440 ms

analytics.js

23 ms

fbevents.js

83 ms

collect

12 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

233 ms

Our browser made a total of 66 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 52% of them (34 requests) were addressed to the original Jamesgrandstaff.com, 6% (4 requests) were made to W.sharethis.com and 5% (3 requests) were made to Facebook.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.6 sec) belongs to the original domain Jamesgrandstaff.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 1.2 MB (40%)

Content Size

2.9 MB

After Optimization

1.7 MB

In fact, the total size of Jamesgrandstaff.com main page is 2.9 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. 40% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 1.8 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-80%

Potential reduce by 46.3 kB

  • Original 57.8 kB
  • After minification 52.9 kB
  • After compression 11.5 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 46.3 kB or 80% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-17%

Potential reduce by 299.9 kB

  • Original 1.8 MB
  • After minification 1.5 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. Obviously, James Grandstaff needs image optimization as it can save up to 299.9 kB or 17% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-71%

Potential reduce by 425.2 kB

  • Original 599.8 kB
  • After minification 599.6 kB
  • After compression 174.6 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 425.2 kB or 71% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-85%

Potential reduce by 388.1 kB

  • Original 458.8 kB
  • After minification 457.8 kB
  • After compression 70.7 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. Jamesgrandstaff.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 388.1 kB or 85% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 29 (46%)

Requests Now

63

After Optimization

34

The browser has sent 63 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of James Grandstaff. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 18 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Accessibility Review

jamesgrandstaff.com accessibility score

80

Accessibility Issues

ARIA

These are opportunities to improve the usage of ARIA in your application which may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

ARIA input fields do not have accessible names

High

[role]s do not have all required [aria-*] attributes

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.

Navigation

These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.

Impact

Issue

High

Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order

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

jamesgrandstaff.com best practices score

67

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

SEO Factors

jamesgrandstaff.com SEO score

98

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

High

Tap targets are not sized appropriately

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 Jamesgrandstaff.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 Jamesgrandstaff.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

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