3.1 sec in total
128 ms
2.9 sec
92 ms
Visit genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com now to see the best up-to-date Genome Editing Life Sciences Review content for United States and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com
Life Sciences Review is a print and digital magazine that provides the neutral platform of business and technology news, expert viewpoints, challenges faced by the life sciences industry, and approach...
Visit genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.comWe analyzed Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com page load time and found that the first response time was 128 ms and then it took 3 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 55% of websites can load faster.
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value4.9 s
10/100
10%
Value5.2 s
23/100
25%
Value7.0 s
32/100
10%
Value1,710 ms
11/100
30%
Value0.286
42/100
15%
Value13.6 s
11/100
10%
128 ms
563 ms
126 ms
96 ms
443 ms
Our browser made a total of 69 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 6% of them (4 requests) were addressed to the original Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com, 46% (32 requests) were made to Lifesciencesreview.com and 7% (5 requests) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.9 sec) relates to the external source Lifesciencesreview.com.
Page size can be reduced by 519.2 kB (43%)
1.2 MB
681.4 kB
In fact, the total size of Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com main page is 1.2 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. 55% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 839.7 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 59.9 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 59.9 kB or 77% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 367 B
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. Genome Editing Life Sciences Review images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 384.9 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 384.9 kB or 46% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 74.0 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. Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 74.0 kB or 29% of the original size.
Number of requests can be reduced by 46 (73%)
63
17
The browser has sent 63 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Genome Editing Life Sciences Review. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 26 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 22 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com
128 ms
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com
563 ms
js
126 ms
css
96 ms
style.css
443 ms
bootstrap.css
574 ms
font-awesome.min.css
396 ms
animate.css
465 ms
owl.carousel.css
345 ms
owl.theme.default.css
346 ms
slicknav.min.css
521 ms
style1.css
539 ms
main.css
652 ms
responsive.css
618 ms
modernizr-3.5.0.min.js
720 ms
css
211 ms
css
209 ms
gpt.js
209 ms
adsbygoogle.js
217 ms
element.js
111 ms
bootstrap.min.css
91 ms
menu-2.css
1003 ms
font-awesome.min.css
90 ms
menu-main2.css
1043 ms
new_region.css
851 ms
menu.js
1269 ms
css
155 ms
font-awesome.min.css
162 ms
bootstrap.min.css
175 ms
jquery.min.js
167 ms
bootstrap.min.js
178 ms
jquery.min.js
1071 ms
owl.carousel.min.js
1087 ms
jquery.waypoints.min.js
1186 ms
jquery.slicknav.min.js
1250 ms
masonry.pkgd.min.js
1473 ms
main.js
1250 ms
smart-sticky.js
1474 ms
theia-sticky-sidebar.js
1836 ms
jquery_cookie.js
1838 ms
custom.js
1836 ms
jquery.easy-ticker.js
1874 ms
owl.carousel.min.js
97 ms
css
14 ms
analytics.js
103 ms
gpt.js
249 ms
Lifescience_final_logo.svg
1241 ms
load.gif
1214 ms
linkedin_cirr.png
1305 ms
x.png
1357 ms
pubads_impl.js
98 ms
collect
95 ms
js
31 ms
mob-menu.png
1113 ms
ads
126 ms
container.html
39 ms
8414405611155677490
247 ms
icon.png
615 ms
abg_lite.js
248 ms
window_focus.js
247 ms
put.html
375 ms
d3d3LmxpZmVzY2llbmNlc3Jldmlldy5jb20=
408 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
113 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
113 ms
fontawesome-webfont93e3.woff
625 ms
dwce_cheq_events
255 ms
test.html
131 ms
cd-top-arrow.svg
283 ms
dwce_cheq_events
123 ms
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com accessibility score
Navigation
These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.
Impact
Issue
[id] attributes on active, focusable elements are not unique
Internationalization and localization
These are opportunities to improve the interpretation of your content by users in different locales.
Impact
Issue
<html> element does not have a [lang] attribute
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
Form elements do not have associated labels
Tables and lists
These are opportunities to improve the experience of reading tabular or list data using assistive technology, like a screen reader.
Impact
Issue
List items (<li>) are not contained within <ul> or <ol> parent elements.
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
User Experience
Impact
Issue
Serves images with low resolution
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
Browser errors were logged to the console
Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com SEO score
Content Best Practices
Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.
Impact
Issue
Links do not have descriptive text
Crawling and Indexing
To appear in search results, crawlers need access to your app.
Impact
Issue
Links are not crawlable
Page is blocked from indexing
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
Document uses legible font sizes
EN
N/A
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and neither this language nor any other was claimed in <html> or <meta> tags. Our system also found out that Genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.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.
genome-editing.lifesciencesreview.com
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Genome Editing Life Sciences Review. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: