Tools & Wizards About Us
moleosophy.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 91

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    91% of other websites

  • 86

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 61% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    80% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    94% of websites

moleosophy.com

kok足彩

Page Load Speed

3 sec in total

First Response

489 ms

Resources Loaded

2 sec

Page Rendered

428 ms

moleosophy.com screenshot

About Website

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

kok足彩官网是亚洲最大的娱乐集团之一,kok体育官网官网提供kok体育官网客户端、kok体育官网手机版下载_更多精彩活动在kok体育官网备用网址等着您

Visit moleosophy.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Moleosophy.com page load time and found that the first response time was 489 ms and then it took 2.5 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 50% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

moleosophy.com performance score

91

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.5 s

69/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value2.9 s

81/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value2.5 s

98/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value70 ms

99/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.029

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value2.8 s

97/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

moleosophy.com

489 ms

style.css

73 ms

bbpress.css

142 ms

styles.css

143 ms

jscolor.js

142 ms

Our browser made a total of 70 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 79% of them (55 requests) were addressed to the original Moleosophy.com, 7% (5 requests) were made to Pagead2.googlesyndication.com and 6% (4 requests) were made to Googleads.g.doubleclick.net. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.1 sec) belongs to the original domain Moleosophy.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 475.1 kB (13%)

Content Size

3.6 MB

After Optimization

3.1 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Moleosophy.com main page is 3.6 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. 65% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 3.2 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-79%

Potential reduce by 19.6 kB

  • Original 24.8 kB
  • After minification 23.9 kB
  • After compression 5.2 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 19.6 kB or 79% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-7%

Potential reduce by 239.1 kB

  • Original 3.2 MB
  • After minification 3.0 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. Moleosophy images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-54%

Potential reduce by 161.2 kB

  • Original 298.7 kB
  • After minification 281.3 kB
  • After compression 137.4 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 161.2 kB or 54% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 55.2 kB

  • Original 66.8 kB
  • After minification 53.7 kB
  • After compression 11.6 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. Moleosophy.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 55.2 kB or 83% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 28 (42%)

Requests Now

67

After Optimization

39

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 67 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Moleosophy. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 20 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 10 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

moleosophy.com

moleosophy.com

489 ms

style.css

style.css

73 ms

bbpress.css

bbpress.css

142 ms

styles.css

styles.css

143 ms

jscolor.js

jscolor.js

142 ms

jquery.js

jquery.js

214 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

140 ms

jquery.corners.js

jquery.corners.js

142 ms

jquery.supersubs.js

jquery.supersubs.js

210 ms

jquery.superfish.js

jquery.superfish.js

211 ms

jquery.cycle.js

jquery.cycle.js

214 ms

main.loading.js

main.loading.js

210 ms

swfobject.js

swfobject.js

23 ms

adsbygoogle.js

adsbygoogle.js

8 ms

editor.js

editor.js

210 ms

jquery.form.min.js

jquery.form.min.js

279 ms

scripts.js

scripts.js

275 ms

required.css

required.css

213 ms

typography.css

typography.css

219 ms

layout.css

layout.css

217 ms

navigation.css

navigation.css

218 ms

pagination.css

pagination.css

281 ms

color.css

color.css

281 ms

slideshow.css

slideshow.css

283 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

wp-emoji-release.min.js

112 ms

moles.png

moles.png

654 ms

site-name.png

site-name.png

275 ms

page_main1-331x186.png

page_main1-331x186.png

344 ms

mole_lip-300x186.png

mole_lip-300x186.png

227 ms

mole_eye-300x186.png

mole_eye-300x186.png

275 ms

mole_ear-300x186.png

mole_ear-300x186.png

329 ms

mole_nose-300x186.png

mole_nose-300x186.png

346 ms

eyebrows-300x186.png

eyebrows-300x186.png

412 ms

page_main1-298x167.png

page_main1-298x167.png

481 ms

mole_lip-298x167.png

mole_lip-298x167.png

471 ms

mole_eye-298x167.png

mole_eye-298x167.png

480 ms

mole_ear-298x167.png

mole_ear-298x167.png

483 ms

mole_nose-298x167.png

mole_nose-298x167.png

551 ms

eyebrows-298x167.png

eyebrows-298x167.png

609 ms

ca-pub-6150543498742432.js

ca-pub-6150543498742432.js

145 ms

zrt_lookup.html

zrt_lookup.html

134 ms

show_ads_impl.js

show_ads_impl.js

136 ms

strip.png

strip.png

511 ms

input-search.png

input-search.png

512 ms

slider-back.png

slider-back.png

722 ms

sliderbg.png

sliderbg.png

859 ms

bg-featured-image.png

bg-featured-image.png

721 ms

bg-topper.png

bg-topper.png

609 ms

bg-body.png

bg-body.png

1112 ms

bg-post.png

bg-post.png

709 ms

ribbon-post-title-col-1.png

ribbon-post-title-col-1.png

646 ms

bg-post-title-col-1.png

bg-post-title-col-1.png

717 ms

ribbon-post-title-col-2.png

ribbon-post-title-col-2.png

778 ms

bg-post-title-col-2.png

bg-post-title-col-2.png

788 ms

ribbon-post-title-col-3.png

ribbon-post-title-col-3.png

788 ms

bg-post-title-col-3.png

bg-post-title-col-3.png

786 ms

mostlymono-webfont.woff

mostlymono-webfont.woff

819 ms

men_in_black.woff

men_in_black.woff

831 ms

arrow-l.png

arrow-l.png

741 ms

arrow-r.png

arrow-r.png

742 ms

ads

ads

244 ms

osd.js

osd.js

11 ms

ads

ads

276 ms

2037260379106473556

2037260379106473556

40 ms

abg.js

abg.js

45 ms

m_js_controller.js

m_js_controller.js

62 ms

googlelogo_color_112x36dp.png

googlelogo_color_112x36dp.png

36 ms

s

s

34 ms

x_button_blue2.png

x_button_blue2.png

35 ms

Tqng9ngJVK4Gqvh3e602hP-HqlN49KFEUSDtmrOPmWo.js

Tqng9ngJVK4Gqvh3e602hP-HqlN49KFEUSDtmrOPmWo.js

3 ms

Accessibility Review

moleosophy.com accessibility score

86

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

moleosophy.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

SEO Factors

moleosophy.com SEO score

100

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

    ZH

  • Language Claimed

    N/A

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Moleosophy.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that Chinese 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 Moleosophy.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

moleosophy.com

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