Tools & Wizards About Us
compare-text-files.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 58

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    74% of other websites

  • 75

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 42% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    56% of websites

  • 93

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    84% of websites

compare-text-files.com

Compare Text Files, Source Code, XML, Scripts & Find Differences

Page Load Speed

2.1 sec in total

First Response

145 ms

Resources Loaded

1.5 sec

Page Rendered

406 ms

compare-text-files.com screenshot

About Website

Welcome to compare-text-files.com homepage info - get ready to check Compare Text Files best content right away, or after learning these important things about compare-text-files.com

Compare text files, xml, documents, source code, scripts and find differences on Windows with Florencesoft TextDiff. Compares folders / directories. Reports and removes duplicates from lists., Compare...

Visit compare-text-files.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Compare-text-files.com page load time and found that the first response time was 145 ms and then it took 1.9 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 35% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

compare-text-files.com performance score

58

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value3.8 s

26/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value5.9 s

14/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value4.8 s

67/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value350 ms

73/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value4.5 s

82/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

compare-text-files.com

145 ms

compare-text-files.com

329 ms

jquery.min.js

154 ms

jquery-noconflict.js

168 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

167 ms

Our browser made a total of 41 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 49% of them (20 requests) were addressed to the original Compare-text-files.com, 44% (18 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 2% (1 request) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (609 ms) belongs to the original domain Compare-text-files.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 564.7 kB (49%)

Content Size

1.2 MB

After Optimization

590.5 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Compare-text-files.com main page is 1.2 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. 65% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 438.9 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-87%

Potential reduce by 184.2 kB

  • Original 212.8 kB
  • After minification 207.3 kB
  • After compression 28.6 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 184.2 kB or 87% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-17%

Potential reduce by 74.9 kB

  • Original 433.4 kB
  • After minification 358.5 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. Obviously, Compare Text Files needs image optimization as it can save up to 74.9 kB or 17% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.

JavaScript Optimization

-69%

Potential reduce by 301.2 kB

  • Original 438.9 kB
  • After minification 438.9 kB
  • After compression 137.7 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 301.2 kB or 69% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-6%

Potential reduce by 4.5 kB

  • Original 70.2 kB
  • After minification 70.2 kB
  • After compression 65.7 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. Compare-text-files.com has all CSS files already compressed.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 6 (29%)

Requests Now

21

After Optimization

15

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 21 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Compare Text Files. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 7 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

compare-text-files.com

compare-text-files.com

145 ms

compare-text-files.com

compare-text-files.com

329 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

154 ms

jquery-noconflict.js

jquery-noconflict.js

168 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

167 ms

bootstrap.min.js

bootstrap.min.js

170 ms

nicepage.css

nicepage.css

218 ms

media.css

media.css

183 ms

css

css

37 ms

nicepage.js

nicepage.js

609 ms

js

js

81 ms

comparetextfileswebsitelogo.png

comparetextfileswebsitelogo.png

61 ms

monitorwithtext.png

monitorwithtext.png

256 ms

colorsforchanges1.png

colorsforchanges1.png

64 ms

colorsforsentencereordering.png

colorsforsentencereordering.png

63 ms

mainuserinterface1.png

mainuserinterface1.png

112 ms

options.png

options.png

63 ms

differencecolors.png

differencecolors.png

113 ms

duplicates.png

duplicates.png

114 ms

comparefolders.png

comparefolders.png

158 ms

separatepanes.png

separatepanes.png

113 ms

combinedpane.png

combinedpane.png

155 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4gaVc.ttf

48 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjr0B4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjr0B4gaVc.ttf

60 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4gaVc.ttf

63 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsgH1x4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsgH1x4gaVc.ttf

63 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4gaVc.ttf

61 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgshZ1x4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgshZ1x4gaVc.ttf

61 ms

KFOmCnqEu92Fr1Mu4mxP.ttf

KFOmCnqEu92Fr1Mu4mxP.ttf

61 ms

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmEU9fBBc9.ttf

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmEU9fBBc9.ttf

80 ms

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmSU5fBBc9.ttf

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmSU5fBBc9.ttf

81 ms

KFOkCnqEu92Fr1MmgVxIIzc.ttf

KFOkCnqEu92Fr1MmgVxIIzc.ttf

82 ms

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmWUlfBBc9.ttf

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmWUlfBBc9.ttf

83 ms

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmYUtfBBc9.ttf

KFOlCnqEu92Fr1MmYUtfBBc9.ttf

81 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk8ZkWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk8ZkWVAexQ.ttf

82 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk_RkWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk_RkWVAexQ.ttf

82 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk5hkWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk5hkWVAexQ.ttf

83 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0RkxhjWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0RkxhjWVAexQ.ttf

83 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0RkyFjWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0RkyFjWVAexQ.ttf

84 ms

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk0ZjWVAexQ.ttf

memQYaGs126MiZpBA-UFUIcVXSCEkx2cmqvXlWq8tWZ0Pw86hd0Rk0ZjWVAexQ.ttf

82 ms

in.php

in.php

143 ms

Accessibility Review

compare-text-files.com accessibility score

75

Accessibility Issues

ARIA

These are opportunities to improve the usage of ARIA in your application which may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

ARIA input fields do not have accessible names

High

Elements with an ARIA [role] that require children to contain a specific [role] are missing some or all of those required children.

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.

Internationalization and localization

These are opportunities to improve the interpretation of your content by users in different locales.

Impact

Issue

High

<html> element does not have a [lang] attribute

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

compare-text-files.com best practices score

83

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

SEO Factors

compare-text-files.com SEO score

93

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

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    N/A

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Compare-text-files.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and neither this language nor any other was claimed in <html> or <meta> tags. Our system also found out that Compare-text-files.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

compare-text-files.com

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