Tools & Wizards About Us
vigilante.us screenshot

Report Summary

  • 99

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    96% of other websites

  • 98

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 94% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    80% of websites

  • 90

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    68% of websites

vigilante.us

Home - Vigilante

Page Load Speed

1.9 sec in total

First Response

352 ms

Resources Loaded

886 ms

Page Rendered

642 ms

vigilante.us screenshot

About Website

Visit vigilante.us now to see the best up-to-date Vigilante content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about vigilante.us

Custom development of training and simulation games and software for high-stakes industries.

Visit vigilante.us

Key Findings

We analyzed Vigilante.us page load time and found that the first response time was 352 ms and then it took 1.5 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 30% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

vigilante.us performance score

99

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value1.6 s

95/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value1.6 s

99/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value1.6 s

100/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value90 ms

99/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.066

97/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value1.8 s

100/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

vigilante.us

352 ms

jquery.min.js

89 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

28 ms

44150492.js

86 ms

ooohboi-steroids.js

228 ms

Our browser made a total of 43 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 86% of them (37 requests) were addressed to the original Vigilante.us, 5% (2 requests) were made to Googletagmanager.com and 2% (1 request) were made to Js.hs-scripts.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (393 ms) belongs to the original domain Vigilante.us.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 976.1 kB (70%)

Content Size

1.4 MB

After Optimization

411.2 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript

In fact, the total size of Vigilante.us main page is 1.4 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. 45% of websites need less resources to load. HTML takes 1.1 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-87%

Potential reduce by 967.1 kB

  • Original 1.1 MB
  • After minification 1.1 MB
  • After compression 141.6 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 967.1 kB or 87% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-2%

Potential reduce by 311 B

  • Original 18.8 kB
  • After minification 18.5 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. Vigilante images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-3%

Potential reduce by 8.7 kB

  • Original 259.8 kB
  • After minification 259.8 kB
  • After compression 251.1 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.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 34 (87%)

Requests Now

39

After Optimization

5

  • Images
  • JavaScript

The browser has sent 39 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Vigilante. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 35 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

vigilante.us

vigilante.us

352 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

89 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

28 ms

44150492.js

44150492.js

86 ms

ooohboi-steroids.js

ooohboi-steroids.js

228 ms

hello-frontend.min.js

hello-frontend.min.js

36 ms

owl.carousel.min.js

owl.carousel.min.js

31 ms

imagesloaded.min.js

imagesloaded.min.js

78 ms

magnific.min.js

magnific.min.js

38 ms

isotope.min.js

isotope.min.js

46 ms

swp-main.js

swp-main.js

51 ms

elementor-script.js

elementor-script.js

51 ms

webpack.runtime.min.js

webpack.runtime.min.js

58 ms

frontend-modules.min.js

frontend-modules.min.js

65 ms

waypoints.min.js

waypoints.min.js

61 ms

core.min.js

core.min.js

73 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

65 ms

sticky-element.js

sticky-element.js

71 ms

complianz.min.js

complianz.min.js

231 ms

jquery.smartmenus.min.js

jquery.smartmenus.min.js

232 ms

premium-eq-height.min.js

premium-eq-height.min.js

245 ms

testimonials.js

testimonials.js

246 ms

tiny-slider.js

tiny-slider.js

246 ms

api.js

api.js

35 ms

webpack-pro.runtime.min.js

webpack-pro.runtime.min.js

244 ms

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

wp-polyfill-inert.min.js

235 ms

regenerator-runtime.min.js

regenerator-runtime.min.js

235 ms

wp-polyfill.min.js

wp-polyfill.min.js

245 ms

hooks.min.js

hooks.min.js

244 ms

i18n.min.js

i18n.min.js

351 ms

frontend.min.js

frontend.min.js

262 ms

elements-handlers.min.js

elements-handlers.min.js

393 ms

gtm.js

gtm.js

213 ms

banner.js

banner.js

115 ms

44150492.js

44150492.js

157 ms

fa-solid-900.woff

fa-solid-900.woff

140 ms

fa-solid-900.woff

fa-solid-900.woff

241 ms

fa-regular-400.woff

fa-regular-400.woff

189 ms

Vigilante-Logo-White.png

Vigilante-Logo-White.png

95 ms

Microsoft-Logo-150x33.png

Microsoft-Logo-150x33.png

144 ms

Epic-Games.png

Epic-Games.png

145 ms

L3Harris-Technologies-Logo-150x33.png

L3Harris-Technologies-Logo-150x33.png

196 ms

js

js

81 ms

Accessibility Review

vigilante.us accessibility score

98

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

vigilante.us best practices score

92

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

SEO Factors

vigilante.us SEO score

90

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Content Best Practices

Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.

Impact

Issue

High

Links do not have descriptive text

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 Vigilante.us 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 Vigilante.us 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

vigilante.us

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