Tools & Wizards About Us
wf.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 26

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    46% of other websites

  • 100

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 97% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    56% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    95% of websites

wf.com

Wells Fargo Bank | Financial Services & Online Banking

Page Load Speed

807 ms in total

First Response

164 ms

Resources Loaded

556 ms

Page Rendered

87 ms

wf.com screenshot

About Website

Visit wf.com now to see the best up-to-date Wf content for United States and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about wf.com

Committed to the financial health of our customers and communities. Explore bank accounts, loans, mortgages, investing, credit cards & banking services»

Visit wf.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Wf.com page load time and found that the first response time was 164 ms and then it took 643 ms to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 10% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

wf.com performance score

26

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.9 s

54/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value6.7 s

8/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value3.9 s

82/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value3,270 ms

2/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.227

55/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value13.3 s

12/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

m.wellsfargo.com

164 ms

80 ms

wf.css

41 ms

wf_mobile_315.png

77 ms

icn_alert_16x16.gif

68 ms

Our browser made a total of 5 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that all of those requests were addressed to Wf.com and no external sources were called. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (164 ms) relates to the external source M.wellsfargo.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 3.5 kB (35%)

Content Size

9.9 kB

After Optimization

6.4 kB

  • HTML
  • Images

In fact, the total size of Wf.com main page is 9.9 kB. This result falls within a vast category (top 1 000 000) of heavyweight, probably not optimized, and thus slow loading web pages. Only 5% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 6.0 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-62%

Potential reduce by 2.4 kB

  • Original 3.9 kB
  • After minification 3.4 kB
  • After compression 1.5 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. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 492 B, which is 13% 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 2.4 kB or 62% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-18%

Potential reduce by 1.1 kB

  • Original 6.0 kB
  • After minification 4.9 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, Wf needs image optimization as it can save up to 1.1 kB or 18% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

Requests Breakdown

We found no issues to fix!

Requests Now

3

After Optimization

3

  • Images
  • CSS

The browser has sent 3 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Wf. According to our analytics all requests are already optimized.

Network Requests Diagram

m.wellsfargo.com

m.wellsfargo.com

164 ms

80 ms

wf.css

wf.css

41 ms

wf_mobile_315.png

wf_mobile_315.png

77 ms

icn_alert_16x16.gif

icn_alert_16x16.gif

68 ms

Accessibility Review

wf.com accessibility score

100

Accessibility Issues

Best Practices

wf.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

wf.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 Wf.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 Wf.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

wf.com

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