2.8 sec in total
130 ms
2.2 sec
462 ms
Visit sigprint.net now to see the best up-to-date Sigprint content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about sigprint.net
Signature Printing & Consulting provide printing solutions for digital and offset printing in Woburn, MA. Contact us for more details.
Visit sigprint.netWe analyzed Sigprint.net page load time and found that the first response time was 130 ms and then it took 2.7 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 50% of websites can load faster.
sigprint.net performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value3.0 s
51/100
10%
Value13.4 s
0/100
25%
Value7.2 s
29/100
10%
Value430 ms
65/100
30%
Value0.058
98/100
15%
Value10.8 s
22/100
10%
130 ms
207 ms
175 ms
230 ms
220 ms
Our browser made a total of 67 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 79% of them (53 requests) were addressed to the original Sigprint.net, 10% (7 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 3% (2 requests) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.1 sec) belongs to the original domain Sigprint.net.
Page size can be reduced by 208.9 kB (12%)
1.8 MB
1.6 MB
In fact, the total size of Sigprint.net main page is 1.8 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. Images take 1.2 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 54.6 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 54.6 kB or 78% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 30.2 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. Sigprint images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 118.7 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 118.7 kB or 31% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 5.4 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. Sigprint.net has all CSS files already compressed.
Number of requests can be reduced by 48 (84%)
57
9
The browser has sent 57 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Sigprint. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 25 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 25 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
sigprint.net
130 ms
sigprint.net
207 ms
prettyPhoto.css
175 ms
wp-video-lightbox.css
230 ms
sbi-styles.min.css
220 ms
style.min.css
190 ms
colorbox.css
198 ms
font-awesome-legacy.min.css
194 ms
style.css
386 ms
grid-system.css
366 ms
style.css
370 ms
header-layout-menu-left-aligned.css
404 ms
element-video-lightbox.css
394 ms
element-wpb-column-border.css
396 ms
css
55 ms
fullpage.css
532 ms
responsive.css
536 ms
ascend.css
559 ms
menu-dynamic.css
590 ms
js_composer.min.css
594 ms
salient-dynamic-styles.css
570 ms
style.css
742 ms
css
64 ms
jquery.min.js
726 ms
jquery-migrate.min.js
608 ms
jquery.prettyPhoto.js
772 ms
video-lightbox.js
761 ms
jquery.colorbox-min.js
764 ms
js
73 ms
classic-10_7.css
38 ms
mc-validate.js
65 ms
style-non-critical.css
832 ms
magnific.css
974 ms
core.css
761 ms
wp-disable-comments.js
1021 ms
jquery.easing.min.js
975 ms
jquery.mousewheel.min.js
974 ms
priority.js
975 ms
transit.min.js
1020 ms
waypoints.js
1097 ms
imagesLoaded.min.js
1105 ms
hoverintent.min.js
1109 ms
magnific.js
1141 ms
jquery.fullPage.min.js
1000 ms
nectar-full-page-rows.js
976 ms
anime.min.js
1083 ms
superfish.js
934 ms
init.js
1113 ms
touchswipe.min.js
1075 ms
comment-reply.min.js
994 ms
js_composer_front.min.js
839 ms
analytics.js
132 ms
Signature-only.white_.png
572 ms
Signature-Logo_black.png
601 ms
14.jpg
776 ms
161-optimized-1.jpg
749 ms
u-440qyriQwlOrhSvowK_l5-fCZK.woff
88 ms
font
89 ms
memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4uaVQ.woff
118 ms
memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4uaVQ.woff
125 ms
memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4uaVQ.woff
126 ms
KFOmCnqEu92Fr1Mu4mxM.woff
126 ms
L0xhDFMnlVwD4h3Lt9JWnbX3jG-2X5XHE1ofFQ.woff
127 ms
collect
80 ms
icomoon.woff
478 ms
fontawesome-webfont.svg
566 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
252 ms
sigprint.net 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
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
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.
sigprint.net best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
sigprint.net 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
EN
EN
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Sigprint.net 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 Sigprint.net 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.
sigprint.net
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Sigprint. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: