Tools & Wizards About Us
reviewshark.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 19

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    36% of other websites

  • 96

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 88% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    55% of websites

  • 93

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    83% of websites

reviewshark.com

Review Shark - Honest, Unbiased Reviews. Helping Consumers Make Better Choices,

Page Load Speed

5.4 sec in total

First Response

1.5 sec

Resources Loaded

3.3 sec

Page Rendered

532 ms

reviewshark.com screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Review Shark content. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about reviewshark.com

Your browser does not support HTML5 video. TRUSTED BY BUSINESSES YOU TRUST LET'S HELP YOU DEVELOP AND STRONG GOOGLE REPUTATION AND HELP YOUR BUSINESS REACH YOUR CUSTOMERS FOR THEIR FEEDBACK. REAC...

Visit reviewshark.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Reviewshark.com page load time and found that the first response time was 1.5 sec and then it took 3.9 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 65% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

reviewshark.com performance score

19

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value7.1 s

1/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value14.0 s

0/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value12.7 s

3/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value1,420 ms

15/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.107

88/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value17.7 s

4/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

reviewshark.com

1499 ms

css

31 ms

global.css

256 ms

style.min.css

382 ms

protect_style.css

193 ms

Our browser made a total of 70 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 90% of them (63 requests) were addressed to the original Reviewshark.com, 7% (5 requests) were made to Fast.wistia.net and 3% (2 requests) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.5 sec) belongs to the original domain Reviewshark.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 1.3 MB (64%)

Content Size

2.0 MB

After Optimization

723.6 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Reviewshark.com main page is 2.0 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. 60% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 804.1 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-84%

Potential reduce by 176.9 kB

  • Original 211.7 kB
  • After minification 203.0 kB
  • After compression 34.8 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 176.9 kB or 84% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-62%

Potential reduce by 302.8 kB

  • Original 486.1 kB
  • After minification 183.3 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, Review Shark needs image optimization as it can save up to 302.8 kB or 62% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-47%

Potential reduce by 380.7 kB

  • Original 804.1 kB
  • After minification 789.8 kB
  • After compression 423.4 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 380.7 kB or 47% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-84%

Potential reduce by 429.6 kB

  • Original 511.7 kB
  • After minification 491.5 kB
  • After compression 82.1 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. Reviewshark.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 429.6 kB or 84% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 43 (64%)

Requests Now

67

After Optimization

24

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 67 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Review Shark. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 29 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 16 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

reviewshark.com

reviewshark.com

1499 ms

css

css

31 ms

global.css

global.css

256 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

382 ms

protect_style.css

protect_style.css

193 ms

public-main.css

public-main.css

261 ms

frontend.min.css

frontend.min.css

195 ms

frontend-lite.min.css

frontend-lite.min.css

197 ms

swiper.min.css

swiper.min.css

318 ms

post-5.css

post-5.css

263 ms

post-731.css

post-731.css

264 ms

eggrehub.css

eggrehub.css

319 ms

style.css

style.css

454 ms

iconstyle.css

iconstyle.css

326 ms

css

css

26 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

329 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

384 ms

price_alert.js

price_alert.js

384 ms

circle-progress.js

circle-progress.js

390 ms

global.js

global.js

395 ms

public-main.js

public-main.js

443 ms

E-v1.js

E-v1.js

28 ms

filterpanel.css

filterpanel.css

318 ms

animations.min.css

animations.min.css

318 ms

inview.js

inview.js

634 ms

pgwmodal.js

pgwmodal.js

635 ms

unveil.js

unveil.js

638 ms

hoverintent.js

hoverintent.js

637 ms

countdown.js

countdown.js

638 ms

custom.js

custom.js

639 ms

userlogin.js

userlogin.js

639 ms

gsap.min.js

gsap.min.js

639 ms

ScrollTrigger.min.js

ScrollTrigger.min.js

639 ms

gsap-init.js

gsap-init.js

640 ms

gsap.min.js

gsap.min.js

642 ms

SplitText.min.js

SplitText.min.js

640 ms

webpack.runtime.min.js

webpack.runtime.min.js

640 ms

frontend-modules.min.js

frontend-modules.min.js

640 ms

waypoints.min.js

waypoints.min.js

640 ms

core.min.js

core.min.js

641 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

583 ms

underscore.min.js

underscore.min.js

580 ms

wp-util.min.js

wp-util.min.js

574 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

520 ms

r1i7otf24w

r1i7otf24w

264 ms

Black-Luxury-Spa-and-Massage-Logo.png

Black-Luxury-Spa-and-Massage-Logo.png

272 ms

blank.gif

blank.gif

273 ms

logo-brown-1.png

logo-brown-1.png

273 ms

logo-copy1-1.png

logo-copy1-1.png

350 ms

SPARK-LASER-CENTER-5898d43c-201w.png

SPARK-LASER-CENTER-5898d43c-201w.png

274 ms

logo.png

logo.png

344 ms

new_files.png

new_files.png

346 ms

hamadiya-blacklogo-2-1.png

hamadiya-blacklogo-2-1.png

347 ms

newdlogo-1.png

newdlogo-1.png

348 ms

cropped-cropped-cropped-logo.png

cropped-cropped-cropped-logo.png

348 ms

headers-logo-1.png

headers-logo-1.png

350 ms

logo1-2.png

logo1-2.png

349 ms

logo-2-1.png

logo-2-1.png

350 ms

logo2-2.png

logo2-2.png

404 ms

new-logo-dr-vs.jpg

new-logo-dr-vs.jpg

497 ms

pura.png

pura.png

147 ms

white-1.png

white-1.png

147 ms

swatch

swatch

83 ms

koru-wellness.png

koru-wellness.png

145 ms

logo-1.png

logo-1.png

145 ms

noimage_336_220.png

noimage_336_220.png

235 ms

iframeApi.js

iframeApi.js

69 ms

FuturaPTLight.otf

FuturaPTLight.otf

90 ms

rhicons.ttf

rhicons.ttf

112 ms

insideIframe.js

insideIframe.js

23 ms

Accessibility Review

reviewshark.com accessibility score

96

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-hidden="true"] elements contain focusable descendents

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

Links do not have a discernible name

Best Practices

reviewshark.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

Displays images with incorrect aspect ratio

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

High

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

reviewshark.com SEO score

93

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Crawling and Indexing

To appear in search results, crawlers need access to your app.

Impact

Issue

High

Links are not crawlable

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 Reviewshark.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 Reviewshark.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

reviewshark.com

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