Tools & Wizards About Us
enwriter.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 44

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    63% of other websites

  • 60

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 26% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    81% of websites

  • 77

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    36% of websites

enwriter.com

502 Bad Gateway

Page Load Speed

999 ms in total

First Response

127 ms

Resources Loaded

683 ms

Page Rendered

189 ms

enwriter.com screenshot

About Website

Visit enwriter.com now to see the best up-to-date Enwriter content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about enwriter.com

Description of your blog.

Visit enwriter.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Enwriter.com page load time and found that the first response time was 127 ms and then it took 872 ms to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 15% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

enwriter.com performance score

44

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.6 s

13/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value5.5 s

19/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value6.0 s

46/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value610 ms

49/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.148

76/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value5.2 s

74/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

www.enwriter.com

127 ms

3645911276-widget_css_bundle.css

75 ms

authorization.css

120 ms

jquery-1.8.3.min.js

48 ms

3731899860-widgets.js

67 ms

Our browser made a total of 13 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 8% of them (1 request) were addressed to the original Enwriter.com, 23% (3 requests) were made to Blogger.com and 15% (2 requests) were made to Apis.google.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (243 ms) relates to the external source 3.bp.blogspot.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 49.3 kB (35%)

Content Size

140.2 kB

After Optimization

90.9 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Enwriter.com main page is 140.2 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. 30% of websites need less resources to load. HTML takes 63.5 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-77%

Potential reduce by 49.1 kB

  • Original 63.5 kB
  • After minification 59.7 kB
  • After compression 14.3 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 49.1 kB or 77% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 5 B

  • Original 30.5 kB
  • After minification 30.5 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. Enwriter images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-0%

Potential reduce by 128 B

  • Original 39.3 kB
  • After minification 39.3 kB
  • After compression 39.2 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

-0%

Potential reduce by 9 B

  • Original 6.9 kB
  • After minification 6.9 kB
  • After compression 6.9 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. Enwriter.com has all CSS files already compressed.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 4 (33%)

Requests Now

12

After Optimization

8

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 12 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Enwriter. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 5 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

www.enwriter.com

www.enwriter.com

127 ms

3645911276-widget_css_bundle.css

3645911276-widget_css_bundle.css

75 ms

authorization.css

authorization.css

120 ms

jquery-1.8.3.min.js

jquery-1.8.3.min.js

48 ms

3731899860-widgets.js

3731899860-widgets.js

67 ms

plusone.js

plusone.js

92 ms

outer.png

outer.png

94 ms

enwriter.com%2Btrusted%2Benglish%2Bcontent%2Bwriter%2Bservices.jpg

enwriter.com%2Btrusted%2Benglish%2Bcontent%2Bwriter%2Bservices.jpg

243 ms

icon18_wrench_allbkg.png

icon18_wrench_allbkg.png

4 ms

js15.js

js15.js

9 ms

Footer.png

Footer.png

84 ms

0.php

0.php

72 ms

cb=gapi.loaded_0

cb=gapi.loaded_0

22 ms

Accessibility Review

enwriter.com accessibility score

60

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.

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

<frame> or <iframe> elements do not have a title

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

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

enwriter.com best practices score

92

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

SEO Factors

enwriter.com SEO score

77

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

Crawling and Indexing

To appear in search results, crawlers need access to your app.

Impact

Issue

High

Links are not crawlable

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

    N/A

  • Language Claimed

    N/A

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Enwriter.com 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) and no language is claimed in <html> or <meta> tags either. Our system also found out that Enwriter.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

enwriter.com

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