Tools & Wizards About Us
what.cd screenshot

Report Summary

  • 78

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    85% of other websites

  • 83

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 56% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    36% of websites

  • 96

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    91% of websites

what.cd

Placeholder

Page Load Speed

1.2 sec in total

First Response

179 ms

Resources Loaded

959 ms

Page Rendered

84 ms

what.cd screenshot

About Website

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

Visit what.cd

Key Findings

We analyzed What.cd page load time and found that the first response time was 179 ms and then it took 1 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 20% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

what.cd performance score

78

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.9 s

53/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value3.5 s

64/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value3.6 s

87/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value220 ms

87/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.082

94/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value5.0 s

77/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

what.cd

179 ms

what.cd

413 ms

style.css

337 ms

jquery.js

26 ms

script_start.js

332 ms

Our browser made a total of 10 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that all of those requests were addressed to What.cd and no external sources were called. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (413 ms) belongs to the original domain What.cd.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 77.1 kB (63%)

Content Size

122.0 kB

After Optimization

44.9 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of What.cd main page is 122.0 kB. This result falls within a vast category (top 1 000 000) of heavyweight, probably not optimized, and thus slow loading web pages. Only a small number of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 113.7 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-54%

Potential reduce by 1.1 kB

  • Original 2.0 kB
  • After minification 1.9 kB
  • After compression 909 B

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 1.1 kB or 54% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 26 B

  • Original 4.7 kB
  • After minification 4.7 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. What images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-66%

Potential reduce by 75.0 kB

  • Original 113.7 kB
  • After minification 107.8 kB
  • After compression 38.7 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. It is highly recommended that all JavaScript files should be compressed and minified as it can save up to 75.0 kB or 66% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-63%

Potential reduce by 1.0 kB

  • Original 1.6 kB
  • After minification 1.3 kB
  • After compression 590 B

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. What.cd needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 1.0 kB or 63% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 5 (63%)

Requests Now

8

After Optimization

3

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 8 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of What. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 6 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

what.cd

what.cd

179 ms

what.cd

what.cd

413 ms

style.css

style.css

337 ms

jquery.js

jquery.js

26 ms

script_start.js

script_start.js

332 ms

ajax.class.js

ajax.class.js

356 ms

cookie.class.js

cookie.class.js

333 ms

storage.class.js

storage.class.js

356 ms

global.js

global.js

356 ms

logo.png

logo.png

4 ms

Accessibility Review

what.cd accessibility score

83

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.

Navigation

These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.

Impact

Issue

High

Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order

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

These items highlight common accessibility best practices.

Impact

Issue

High

[user-scalable="no"] is used in the <meta name="viewport"> element or the [maximum-scale] attribute is less than 5.

Best Practices

what.cd best practices score

75

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

High

Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities

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

what.cd SEO score

96

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

High

Tap targets are not sized appropriately

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    N/A

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise What.cd can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Unfortunately we cannot identify language used on the page (probably there is a mix of languages, too little text or something else), while the claimed language is English. Our system also found out that What.cd 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

what.cd

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