3 sec in total
294 ms
2.6 sec
197 ms
Welcome to picseeker.com homepage info - get ready to check Picseeker best content right away, or after learning these important things about picseeker.com
Buy a domain and see how a premium domain can be the best investment. Your business starts here. Buy a domain today.
Visit picseeker.comWe analyzed Picseeker.com page load time and found that the first response time was 294 ms and then it took 2.7 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 50% of websites can load faster.
picseeker.com performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value4.2 s
19/100
10%
Value5.8 s
15/100
25%
Value4.2 s
77/100
10%
Value580 ms
51/100
30%
Value0.077
95/100
15%
Value6.7 s
56/100
10%
294 ms
234 ms
87 ms
47 ms
80 ms
Our browser made a total of 94 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 0% of them (0 request) were addressed to the original Picseeker.com, 6% (6 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 5% (5 requests) were made to Google.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (322 ms) relates to the external source Gstatic.com.
Page size can be reduced by 739.0 kB (65%)
1.1 MB
405.9 kB
In fact, the total size of Picseeker.com main page is 1.1 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. Javascripts take 770.3 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 34.2 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 34.2 kB or 75% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 3.5 kB
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, Picseeker needs image optimization as it can save up to 3.5 kB or 20% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.
Potential reduce by 512.0 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. It is highly recommended that all JavaScript files should be compressed and minified as it can save up to 512.0 kB or 66% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 189.3 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. Picseeker.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 189.3 kB or 61% of the original size.
Number of requests can be reduced by 56 (68%)
82
26
The browser has sent 82 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Picseeker. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 47 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 11 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
picseeker.com
294 ms
monetate.js
234 ms
application.css
87 ms
ng-modal.css
47 ms
angular.min.js
80 ms
ng-modal.js
46 ms
google_analytics.js
45 ms
google_oauth.js
44 ms
bold_chat.js
70 ms
eloqua.js
69 ms
hotjar.js
69 ms
adroll.js
64 ms
impactRadius.js
77 ms
in.js
102 ms
api.js
115 ms
api:client.js
105 ms
app.js
75 ms
cookies.js
73 ms
socialMedia.js
73 ms
countryDropdown.js
74 ms
monetate.js
77 ms
index.js
78 ms
lander.js
76 ms
seoPages.js
71 ms
sitePages.js
78 ms
search.js
77 ms
modal.js
79 ms
forms.js
80 ms
tldSelector.js
78 ms
setFixedTop.js
77 ms
searchBar.js
79 ms
currency.js
79 ms
trust.js
85 ms
conversion.js
76 ms
lander-v2.css
86 ms
tdfs-inner.css
83 ms
tdfs-temp.css
83 ms
thankyou.css
84 ms
entry.js
11 ms
css
25 ms
fontawesome.min.css
7 ms
bd-icons.min.css
9 ms
ga.js
29 ms
foundation-A136666-2811-40ba-bff2-3df3af8bc2ae1.min.js
62 ms
userspace
82 ms
cb=gapi.loaded_0
64 ms
recaptcha__en.js
322 ms
all.js
318 ms
320 ms
ss-social-regular.css
51 ms
css
43 ms
logo-header-2x.png
37 ms
__utm.gif
277 ms
foundation-tags-SD780-3f5b-4f28-957f-6e6dc25a7fc41.min.js
264 ms
__utm.gif
253 ms
cb=gapi.loaded_1
189 ms
275 ms
hotjar-10205.js
145 ms
elqCfg.min.js
137 ms
postmessageRelay
188 ms
framework
147 ms
collect
197 ms
__utm.gif
102 ms
119 ms
DXI1ORHCpsQm3Vp6mXoaTYnF5uFdDttMLvmWuJdhhgs.ttf
116 ms
cJZKeOuBrn4kERxqtaUH3aCWcynf_cDxXwCLxiixG1c.ttf
121 ms
MTP_ySUJH_bn48VBG8sNSonF5uFdDttMLvmWuJdhhgs.ttf
132 ms
k3k702ZOKiLJc3WVjuplzInF5uFdDttMLvmWuJdhhgs.ttf
170 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
119 ms
svrGP
195 ms
anchor
164 ms
modules-043c1e6abe660c48857202e419ff9d8a.js
115 ms
214 ms
iframe
70 ms
xd_arbiter.php
119 ms
xd_arbiter.php
211 ms
3193398744-postmessagerelay.js
90 ms
rpc:shindig_random.js
89 ms
1233565733-idpiframe.js
120 ms
svrGP.aspx
103 ms
styles__ltr.css
27 ms
cb=gapi.loaded_0
69 ms
-FHGegChvKELgmHNPF97Aj33qC9PBXl7UyexHItfpAU.js
43 ms
webworker.js
43 ms
logo_48.png
39 ms
zN7GBFwfMP4uA6AR0HCoLQ.ttf
87 ms
RxZJdnzeo3R5zSexge8UUaCWcynf_cDxXwCLxiixG1c.ttf
90 ms
iframerpc
76 ms
recaptcha__en.js
40 ms
vms.js
79 ms
roundtrip.js
8 ms
6ESKICLQUVAGDN5NI2ETS4.js
126 ms
xd_arbiter.php
40 ms
bc.pv
74 ms
picseeker.com accessibility score
Contrast
These are opportunities to improve the legibility of your content.
Impact
Issue
Background and foreground colors do not have a sufficient contrast ratio.
Navigation
These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.
Impact
Issue
Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order
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
Links do not have a discernible name
picseeker.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
picseeker.com SEO score
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 Picseeker.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 Picseeker.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.
picseeker.com
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Picseeker. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: