12.9 sec in total
265 ms
12.2 sec
346 ms
Visit ufp.es now to see the best up-to-date UFP content for Spain and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about ufp.es
UFP es líder en la distribución de consumibles informáticos. Ofrecemos a nuestros clientes el mejor precio, el mejor servicio y los mejores valores añadidos
Visit ufp.esWe analyzed Ufp.es page load time and found that the first response time was 265 ms and then it took 12.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 90% of websites can load faster.
ufp.es performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value9.2 s
0/100
10%
Value24.0 s
0/100
25%
Value26.9 s
0/100
10%
Value4,890 ms
0/100
30%
Value0.2
62/100
15%
Value26.0 s
0/100
10%
265 ms
3894 ms
355 ms
359 ms
355 ms
Our browser made a total of 90 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 69% of them (62 requests) were addressed to the original Ufp.es, 13% (12 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 3% (3 requests) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (3.9 sec) belongs to the original domain Ufp.es.
Page size can be reduced by 3.2 MB (76%)
4.2 MB
1.0 MB
In fact, the total size of Ufp.es main page is 4.2 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. 70% of websites need less resources to load. CSS take 2.1 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 144.5 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 144.5 kB or 80% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 0 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. UFP images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 1.2 MB
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 1.2 MB or 63% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 1.9 MB
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. Ufp.es needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 1.9 MB or 88% of the original size.
Number of requests can be reduced by 60 (85%)
71
11
The browser has sent 71 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of UFP. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 33 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 29 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
ufp.es
265 ms
www.ufp.es
3894 ms
validationEngine.jquery.css
355 ms
styles.css
359 ms
wptu-front.css
355 ms
icomoon-the7-font.min.css
439 ms
all.min.css
523 ms
back-compat.min.css
534 ms
Defaults.css
617 ms
front.min.css
452 ms
js_composer.min.css
1369 ms
css
36 ms
main.min.css
1119 ms
custom-scrollbar.min.css
696 ms
wpbakery.min.css
694 ms
post-type.min.css
864 ms
css-vars.css
792 ms
custom.css
1129 ms
media.css
999 ms
mega-menu.css
884 ms
the7-elements-albums-portfolio.css
958 ms
post-type-dynamic.css
978 ms
style.css
1051 ms
ultimate.min.css
1827 ms
icons.css
1092 ms
jquery.min.js
1315 ms
jquery-migrate.min.js
1185 ms
front.min.js
1210 ms
above-the-fold.min.js
1216 ms
js
73 ms
modernizr-custom.min.js
1295 ms
core.min.js
1305 ms
ultimate.min.js
1475 ms
ultimate_bg.min.js
1636 ms
modal-all.min.js
1638 ms
api.js
36 ms
css
19 ms
stripes.css
1423 ms
rs6.css
1255 ms
main.min.js
1537 ms
jquery.adrotate.dyngroup.js
1351 ms
jquery.adrotate.clicktracker.js
1351 ms
wp-polyfill-inert.min.js
1352 ms
regenerator-runtime.min.js
1464 ms
float.js
28 ms
wp-polyfill.min.js
1612 ms
index.js
1410 ms
rbtools.min.js
1534 ms
rs6.min.js
1861 ms
legacy.min.js
1391 ms
jquery-mousewheel.min.js
1310 ms
custom-scrollbar.min.js
1326 ms
post-type.min.js
1321 ms
js_composer_front.min.js
1234 ms
breaking-news-ticker.min.js
1215 ms
wptu-public.js
1205 ms
akismet-frontend.js
1154 ms
gridsystem.min.css
1063 ms
analytics.js
174 ms
ufp-logo-mobile.png
367 ms
ufp-logo.png
262 ms
the7-chevron-down.svg
367 ms
dummy.png
369 ms
ufp-logo-mobile-inverse.png
262 ms
1Ptxg8zYS_SKggPN4iEgvnHyvveLxVvaorCIPrQVIT9d4cw.ttf
132 ms
1Ptxg8zYS_SKggPN4iEgvnHyvveLxVsEpbCIPrQVIT9d4cw.ttf
131 ms
1Ptxg8zYS_SKggPN4iEgvnHyvveLxVs9pbCIPrQVIT9d4cw.ttf
130 ms
NaPDcZTIAOhVxoMyOr9n_E7ffGjEGItzZpabuWI.ttf
385 ms
NaPDcZTIAOhVxoMyOr9n_E7ffAzHGItzZpabuWI.ttf
233 ms
NaPecZTIAOhVxoMyOr9n_E7fdMPmCKZRbrw.ttf
132 ms
NaPDcZTIAOhVxoMyOr9n_E7ffBzCGItzZpabuWI.ttf
386 ms
NaPDcZTIAOhVxoMyOr9n_E7ffHjDGItzZpabuWI.ttf
131 ms
icomoon-the7-font.ttf
387 ms
fa-solid-900.woff
387 ms
fa-regular-400.woff
386 ms
KFOmCnqEu92Fr1Mu4mxPKTU1Kg.ttf
131 ms
KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmWUlfBBc9AMP6lQ.ttf
131 ms
collect
101 ms
Defaults.woff
538 ms
recaptcha__en.js
163 ms
js
104 ms
memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4gaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf
80 ms
v2.zopim.com
87 ms
asset_composer.js
80 ms
fallback
42 ms
fallback
63 ms
fallback__ltr.css
5 ms
css
18 ms
logo_48.png
5 ms
KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmEU9fBBc9AMP6lQ.ttf
27 ms
ufp.es 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
[id] attributes on active, focusable elements are not unique
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
ARIA IDs are not unique
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
Best practices
These items highlight common accessibility best practices.
Impact
Issue
[user-scalable="no"] is used in the <meta name="viewport"> element or the [maximum-scale] attribute is less than 5.
ufp.es best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
User Experience
Impact
Issue
Displays images with incorrect aspect ratio
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
ufp.es 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
Tap targets are not sized appropriately
ES
ES
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Ufp.es can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that Spanish is used on the page, and it matches the claimed language. Our system also found out that Ufp.es 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.
ufp.es
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of PARSED_DOMAIN, but there is no image specified in description. It would be a good idea for the website admin to select a nice image that can properly represent the website in Open Graph data, otherwise the first found image will be taken for this purpose and social media information block will look like this: