Tools & Wizards About Us
video-comparer.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 80

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    86% of other websites

  • 95

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 86% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 90

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    68% of websites

video-comparer.com

Video Comparer - Find & Remove duplicate videos by content

Page Load Speed

2.6 sec in total

First Response

432 ms

Resources Loaded

2 sec

Page Rendered

123 ms

video-comparer.com screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Video Comparer content for Russia. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about video-comparer.com

Video Comparer software quickly finds video duplicate files on your hard disks. It's easy to manage duplicates with the synchronized timeline thumbnails.

Visit video-comparer.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Video-comparer.com page load time and found that the first response time was 432 ms and then it took 2.2 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 45% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

video-comparer.com performance score

80

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value3.5 s

36/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value3.5 s

65/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value4.0 s

81/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value140 ms

95/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value3.8 s

90/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

video-comparer.com

432 ms

twoColFixLtHdr.css

94 ms

product.css

179 ms

js

69 ms

header_backgroud.png

87 ms

Our browser made a total of 24 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 96% of them (23 requests) were addressed to the original Video-comparer.com, 4% (1 request) were made to Googletagmanager.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (649 ms) belongs to the original domain Video-comparer.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 7.6 kB (3%)

Content Size

295.6 kB

After Optimization

288.0 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Video-comparer.com main page is 295.6 kB. This result falls beyond the top 1M of websites and identifies a large and not optimized web page that may take ages to load. Only 10% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 284.2 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-70%

Potential reduce by 6.2 kB

  • Original 8.8 kB
  • After minification 7.3 kB
  • After compression 2.7 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. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 1.5 kB, which is 17% of the original size. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 6.2 kB or 70% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 829 B

  • Original 284.2 kB
  • After minification 283.3 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. Video Comparer images are well optimized though.

CSS Optimization

-24%

Potential reduce by 628 B

  • Original 2.6 kB
  • After minification 2.6 kB
  • After compression 2.0 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. Video-comparer.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 628 B or 24% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 8 (35%)

Requests Now

23

After Optimization

15

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 23 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Video Comparer. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

video-comparer.com

video-comparer.com

432 ms

twoColFixLtHdr.css

twoColFixLtHdr.css

94 ms

product.css

product.css

179 ms

js

js

69 ms

header_backgroud.png

header_backgroud.png

87 ms

video-comparer-logo.png

video-comparer-logo.png

163 ms

button_normal.png

button_normal.png

171 ms

button_active.png

button_active.png

243 ms

sidebar-top-background.png

sidebar-top-background.png

244 ms

feed-icon-14x14.png

feed-icon-14x14.png

244 ms

home-edition-frame.png

home-edition-frame.png

246 ms

expert-edition-frame.png

expert-edition-frame.png

246 ms

pro-edition-frame.png

pro-edition-frame.png

253 ms

PayPal_logo_80x35.png

PayPal_logo_80x35.png

328 ms

softpedia_clean_award_f.png

softpedia_clean_award_f.png

329 ms

findmysoft_5_VideoComparer_award.png

findmysoft_5_VideoComparer_award.png

328 ms

fileguru_banner_rate5_s.png

fileguru_banner_rate5_s.png

331 ms

windows8downloads_award_5.png

windows8downloads_award_5.png

332 ms

content-top-background.png

content-top-background.png

338 ms

FilmRollTop.png

FilmRollTop.png

647 ms

video-comparer-duplicate-small.png

video-comparer-duplicate-small.png

649 ms

RecycleBin.png

RecycleBin.png

413 ms

Analyze.png

Analyze.png

414 ms

Select.png

Select.png

415 ms

Accessibility Review

video-comparer.com accessibility score

95

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.

Best Practices

video-comparer.com best practices score

75

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

SEO Factors

video-comparer.com SEO score

90

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Crawling and Indexing

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

Impact

Issue

High

robots.txt is not valid

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

High

Tap targets are not sized appropriately

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 Video-comparer.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 Video-comparer.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

video-comparer.com

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