Tools & Wizards About Us
clonefileschecker.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 47

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    65% of other websites

  • 100

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 97% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    35% of websites

  • 100

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    94% of websites

clonefileschecker.com

Best duplicate file finder Windows 11, 10, PC, Mac. Deduplicate files. Video duplicate finder. iTunes duplicate remover. Delete duplicate music and fi...

Page Load Speed

3 sec in total

First Response

128 ms

Resources Loaded

2.4 sec

Page Rendered

515 ms

clonefileschecker.com screenshot

About Website

Welcome to clonefileschecker.com homepage info - get ready to check Clone Files Checker best content for United States right away, or after learning these important things about clonefileschecker.com

Files in millions, size in terabytes? Get full-stack duplicate file finder for Windows, Mac, USB, and Network. Clone Files Checker is the best duplicate finder with friendly support.

Visit clonefileschecker.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Clonefileschecker.com page load time and found that the first response time was 128 ms and then it took 2.9 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 55% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

clonefileschecker.com performance score

47

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value1.9 s

88/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value9.7 s

0/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value6.0 s

46/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value440 ms

64/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.166

71/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value9.0 s

34/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

clonefileschecker.com

128 ms

j6bgxyxfd2

85 ms

gtm.js

95 ms

bootstrap.min.css

48 ms

custom.min.css

162 ms

Our browser made a total of 53 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 68% of them (36 requests) were addressed to the original Clonefileschecker.com, 6% (3 requests) were made to Googletagmanager.com and 6% (3 requests) were made to Cdn.jsdelivr.net. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (2.3 sec) relates to the external source Sorcim-technologies-pvt-ltd.odoo.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 118.0 kB (41%)

Content Size

288.8 kB

After Optimization

170.8 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Clonefileschecker.com main page is 288.8 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. 45% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 172.8 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-80%

Potential reduce by 57.2 kB

  • Original 71.1 kB
  • After minification 46.6 kB
  • After compression 13.9 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 24.5 kB, which is 34% 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 57.2 kB or 80% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-30%

Potential reduce by 52.6 kB

  • Original 172.8 kB
  • After minification 120.1 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, Clone Files Checker needs image optimization as it can save up to 52.6 kB or 30% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 303 B

  • Original 23.2 kB
  • After minification 23.2 kB
  • After compression 22.9 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.

CSS Optimization

-36%

Potential reduce by 7.8 kB

  • Original 21.7 kB
  • After minification 21.7 kB
  • After compression 13.9 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. Clonefileschecker.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 7.8 kB or 36% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 17 (34%)

Requests Now

50

After Optimization

33

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 50 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Clone Files Checker. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 15 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 4 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

clonefileschecker.com

clonefileschecker.com

128 ms

j6bgxyxfd2

j6bgxyxfd2

85 ms

gtm.js

gtm.js

95 ms

bootstrap.min.css

bootstrap.min.css

48 ms

custom.min.css

custom.min.css

162 ms

animate.compat.min.css

animate.compat.min.css

59 ms

cookieconsent.css

cookieconsent.css

56 ms

js

js

144 ms

js

js

191 ms

fb_tracker.js

fb_tracker.js

57 ms

tp.widget.bootstrap.min.js

tp.widget.bootstrap.min.js

28 ms

2

2

971 ms

assets_embed.js

assets_embed.js

2289 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

43 ms

popper.min.js

popper.min.js

32 ms

bootstrap.min.js

bootstrap.min.js

35 ms

tp.widget.bootstrap.min.js

tp.widget.bootstrap.min.js

32 ms

clarity.js

clarity.js

21 ms

bat.js

bat.js

48 ms

center_duplicate_img.webp

center_duplicate_img.webp

47 ms

logo_new.jpg

logo_new.jpg

42 ms

facebook.png

facebook.png

51 ms

youtube.png

youtube.png

104 ms

tammy.webp

tammy.webp

107 ms

robin-morris.webp

robin-morris.webp

45 ms

bret-aldair.webp

bret-aldair.webp

44 ms

stars-5.svg

stars-5.svg

50 ms

1.png

1.png

104 ms

2.png

2.png

104 ms

hard-disk.webp

hard-disk.webp

103 ms

diagram.webp

diagram.webp

104 ms

cloud-computing.webp

cloud-computing.webp

105 ms

rocket.webp

rocket.webp

105 ms

locked.webp

locked.webp

105 ms

a.webp

a.webp

111 ms

b.webp

b.webp

111 ms

c.webp

c.webp

110 ms

universal.webp

universal.webp

112 ms

4step.webp

4step.webp

111 ms

cloud.webp

cloud.webp

116 ms

image8.png

image8.png

122 ms

image9.png

image9.png

125 ms

image3.png

image3.png

124 ms

image10.jpg

image10.jpg

128 ms

image5.png

image5.png

133 ms

image6.png

image6.png

144 ms

image4.png

image4.png

144 ms

image1.png

image1.png

145 ms

image11.png

image11.png

145 ms

speeed.webp

speeed.webp

147 ms

fbds.js

fbds.js

25 ms

4015651.js

4015651.js

67 ms

fontello.woff

fontello.woff

24 ms

Accessibility Review

clonefileschecker.com accessibility score

100

Accessibility Issues

Best Practices

clonefileschecker.com 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

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

High

Browser errors were logged to the console

High

Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript

SEO Factors

clonefileschecker.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 Clonefileschecker.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 Clonefileschecker.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

clonefileschecker.com

Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Clone Files Checker. 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: