Tools & Wizards About Us
stylerecap.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 95

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    93% of other websites

  • 98

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 94% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    55% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    94% of websites

stylerecap.com

Electric Shaver and Grooming Guides & Reviews | Style Recap

Page Load Speed

1.9 sec in total

First Response

208 ms

Resources Loaded

742 ms

Page Rendered

906 ms

stylerecap.com screenshot

About Website

Visit stylerecap.com now to see the best up-to-date Style Recap content for India and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about stylerecap.com

The best guide for buying electric shavers and razors. Get constantly updated reviews and comparisons for the best shavers and trimmers for you.

Visit stylerecap.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Stylerecap.com page load time and found that the first response time was 208 ms and then it took 1.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 35% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

stylerecap.com performance score

95

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.4 s

72/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value2.4 s

91/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value2.4 s

98/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value20 ms

100/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value2.4 s

98/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

stylerecap.com

208 ms

gppstub.js

32 ms

style.min.css

25 ms

astra-local-fonts.css

21 ms

style.min.css

23 ms

Our browser made a total of 54 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 94% of them (51 requests) were addressed to the original Stylerecap.com, 4% (2 requests) were made to The.gatekeeperconsent.com and 2% (1 request) were made to Images.dmca.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (376 ms) belongs to the original domain Stylerecap.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 209.3 kB (12%)

Content Size

1.8 MB

After Optimization

1.6 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Stylerecap.com main page is 1.8 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. 50% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 1.5 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-84%

Potential reduce by 198.6 kB

  • Original 236.6 kB
  • After minification 236.5 kB
  • After compression 37.9 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 198.6 kB or 84% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 10.2 kB

  • Original 1.5 MB
  • After minification 1.4 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. Style Recap images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 433 B

  • Original 44.4 kB
  • After minification 44.4 kB
  • After compression 43.9 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. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.

CSS Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 79 B

  • Original 41.3 kB
  • After minification 41.3 kB
  • After compression 41.2 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. Stylerecap.com has all CSS files already compressed.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 20 (38%)

Requests Now

52

After Optimization

32

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 52 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Style Recap. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 15 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 7 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

stylerecap.com

stylerecap.com

208 ms

gppstub.js

gppstub.js

32 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

25 ms

astra-local-fonts.css

astra-local-fonts.css

21 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

23 ms

frontend_blocks_deprecated_v2.css

frontend_blocks_deprecated_v2.css

22 ms

contact-form-7-main.min.css

contact-form-7-main.min.css

63 ms

tablepress-combined.min.css

tablepress-combined.min.css

19 ms

ccpaplus.js

ccpaplus.js

52 ms

astra-widget-social-profiles.min.css

astra-widget-social-profiles.min.css

27 ms

lazyload.min.js

lazyload.min.js

50 ms

boise.js

boise.js

23 ms

abilene.js

abilene.js

30 ms

et.js

et.js

22 ms

mulvane.js

mulvane.js

47 ms

wichita.js

wichita.js

48 ms

raleigh.js

raleigh.js

47 ms

vista.js

vista.js

47 ms

drake.js

drake.js

32 ms

jellyfish.js

jellyfish.js

31 ms

dmca-badge-w150-5x1-10.png

dmca-badge-w150-5x1-10.png

25 ms

style-recap-200x47.png

style-recap-200x47.png

22 ms

5f7663cff28c0.jpg

5f7663cff28c0.jpg

78 ms

Best-Electric-Shaver-For-Sensitive-Skin-1024x576.jpg

Best-Electric-Shaver-For-Sensitive-Skin-1024x576.jpg

83 ms

Best-trimmer-for-balls-1024x576.jpg

Best-trimmer-for-balls-1024x576.jpg

82 ms

Best-back-shavers-for-men-1-1024x576.jpg

Best-back-shavers-for-men-1-1024x576.jpg

92 ms

under-50.jpg

under-50.jpg

75 ms

meridian-trimmer-review.png

meridian-trimmer-review.png

133 ms

5f859670302c5.jpg

5f859670302c5.jpg

136 ms

manscaped-vs-meridian.jpg

manscaped-vs-meridian.jpg

138 ms

Closest-shave-electric-razor-1024x576.jpg

Closest-shave-electric-razor-1024x576.jpg

173 ms

elder-man-holding-electric-shaver-for-his-beard.jpg

elder-man-holding-electric-shaver-for-his-beard.jpg

172 ms

young-boy-shaving-for-the-first-time-1.jpg

young-boy-shaving-for-the-first-time-1.jpg

171 ms

black-man-shaving-e1613167156529.jpg

black-man-shaving-e1613167156529.jpg

143 ms

manscaped-4.0-review.png

manscaped-4.0-review.png

170 ms

Pansonic-feautred.jpg

Pansonic-feautred.jpg

194 ms

philips-norelco-7200.jpg

philips-norelco-7200.jpg

219 ms

philips-norelco-3100-review.jpg

philips-norelco-3100-review.jpg

201 ms

Manscaped-4.0-vs-Meridian-1024x576.jpg

Manscaped-4.0-vs-Meridian-1024x576.jpg

219 ms

Bakblade-Vs-Mangroomer-1-1024x576.jpg

Bakblade-Vs-Mangroomer-1-1024x576.jpg

226 ms

manscaped-vs-brio-1024x576.jpg

manscaped-vs-brio-1024x576.jpg

231 ms

braun.jpg

braun.jpg

251 ms

5f453c7a4e18b.jpg

5f453c7a4e18b.jpg

285 ms

nmm.jpg

nmm.jpg

270 ms

Can-I-Use-Nair-On-My-Balls-1024x576.jpg

Can-I-Use-Nair-On-My-Balls-1024x576.jpg

227 ms

Can-I-Use-Nair-On-My-Back-1024x576.jpg

Can-I-Use-Nair-On-My-Back-1024x576.jpg

322 ms

man-has-razor-bumps-while-shaving-1-e1614347962194.jpg

man-has-razor-bumps-while-shaving-1-e1614347962194.jpg

286 ms

How-often-should-you-manscape-1024x576.jpg

How-often-should-you-manscape-1024x576.jpg

302 ms

does-shaving-make-you-look-younger-864x1024.jpg

does-shaving-make-you-look-younger-864x1024.jpg

376 ms

electric-razor-lubricant.jpg

electric-razor-lubricant.jpg

332 ms

olathe.js

olathe.js

279 ms

vitals.js

vitals.js

283 ms

chanute.js

chanute.js

288 ms

astra.woff

astra.woff

137 ms

Accessibility Review

stylerecap.com accessibility score

98

Accessibility Issues

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

stylerecap.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

Serves images with low resolution

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

SEO Factors

stylerecap.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

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Stylerecap.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 Stylerecap.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

stylerecap.com

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