644 ms in total
9 ms
413 ms
222 ms
Welcome to comparisons.org homepage info - get ready to check Comparisons best content for United States right away, or after learning these important things about comparisons.org
Visit comparisons.orgWe analyzed Comparisons.org page load time and found that the first response time was 9 ms and then it took 635 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.
comparisons.org performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value2.4 s
69/100
10%
Value3.4 s
66/100
25%
Value2.4 s
98/100
10%
Value60 ms
100/100
30%
Value0.004
100/100
15%
Value3.5 s
92/100
10%
9 ms
24 ms
108 ms
147 ms
36 ms
Our browser made a total of 55 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 4% of them (2 requests) were addressed to the original Comparisons.org, 75% (41 requests) were made to Mfcdn.s3.amazonaws.com and 13% (7 requests) were made to D31otfhas71ais.cloudfront.net. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (216 ms) relates to the external source D31otfhas71ais.cloudfront.net.
Page size can be reduced by 49.0 kB (5%)
1.0 MB
985.2 kB
In fact, the total size of Comparisons.org main page is 1.0 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. 40% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 946.2 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 19.6 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. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 3.3 kB, which is 14% 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 19.6 kB or 81% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 28.7 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. Comparisons images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 0 B
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.
Potential reduce by 764 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. Comparisons.org has all CSS files already compressed.
We found no issues to fix!
8
8
The browser has sent 8 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Comparisons. According to our analytics all requests are already optimized.
comparisons.org
9 ms
comparisons.org
24 ms
bootstrap.min.css
108 ms
custom.css
147 ms
css
36 ms
jquery-3.1.1.min.js
216 ms
bootstrap.min.js
161 ms
logo.png
70 ms
aff_i
56 ms
iconFacebook.png
70 ms
iconReviews.png
94 ms
iconBrands.png
89 ms
iconCategories.png
64 ms
photo_life.jpg
93 ms
photo_debt.jpg
73 ms
photo_homeSecurity.jpg
72 ms
photo_homeWarranty.jpg
89 ms
photo_auto.jpg
105 ms
photo_mortgage.jpg
92 ms
photo_personalLoans.jpg
91 ms
photo_dating.jpg
92 ms
photo_antivirus.jpg
103 ms
photo_taxSoftware.jpg
105 ms
photo_creditRepair.jpg
108 ms
photo_vpn.jpg
104 ms
photo_websiteBuilder.jpg
105 ms
photo_moving.jpg
109 ms
photo_mealKit.jpg
110 ms
photo_homeInsurance.jpg
112 ms
photo_casualGames.jpg
111 ms
photo_mattresses.jpg
119 ms
photo_medicalAlerts.jpg
120 ms
logo_quicken.png
120 ms
logo_newyorklife.png
120 ms
logo_lendingtree.png
121 ms
logo_sofi.png
122 ms
logo_aig.png
122 ms
logo_loandepot.png
123 ms
logo_freedom.png
124 ms
logo_zoosk.png
123 ms
logo_match.png
124 ms
logo_norton.png
130 ms
logo_statefarm.png
125 ms
logo_esurance.png
127 ms
65252bae064de7171c06b1b2.jpg
84 ms
65252b155bd12625e20f42d2.jpg
126 ms
65252ac4699d5ded7b0cfa42.jpg
102 ms
snfrs0ip98hx6mrEJLgK.ttf
31 ms
snfos0ip98hx6mrMn50aOfl8.ttf
50 ms
0nksC9P7MfYHj2oFtYm2ChTtgP4.ttf
65 ms
logo_lendingclub.png
80 ms
logo_progressive.png
71 ms
logo_prosper.png
68 ms
photo_summit.jpg
65 ms
logoFooter.png
69 ms
comparisons.org accessibility score
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
Buttons do not have an accessible name
Image elements do not have [alt] attributes
Links do not have a discernible name
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
comparisons.org best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
Browser errors were logged to the console
comparisons.org SEO score
Crawling and Indexing
To appear in search results, crawlers need access to your app.
Impact
Issue
Links are not crawlable
Content Best Practices
Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.
Impact
Issue
Image elements do not have [alt] attributes
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
Tap targets are not sized appropriately
EN
EN
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Comparisons.org 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 Comparisons.org 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.
comparisons.org
Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Comparisons. 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: