Tools & Wizards About Us
laidlaw.ae screenshot

Report Summary

  • 33

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    53% of other websites

  • 86

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 61% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    55% of websites

  • 86

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    60% of websites

laidlaw.ae

One moment, please...

Page Load Speed

7.4 sec in total

First Response

305 ms

Resources Loaded

6.6 sec

Page Rendered

416 ms

laidlaw.ae screenshot

About Website

Visit laidlaw.ae now to see the best up-to-date Laidlaw content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about laidlaw.ae

Laidlaw Gulf LLC is a market leader in the supply of architectural ironmongery and timber doorsets and is part of a group of companies including Laidlaw Asia Limited, an ironmongery distribution busin...

Visit laidlaw.ae

Key Findings

We analyzed Laidlaw.ae page load time and found that the first response time was 305 ms and then it took 7.1 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 80% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

laidlaw.ae performance score

33

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.3 s

17/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value8.7 s

1/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value11.7 s

4/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value240 ms

85/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.688

7/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value8.6 s

37/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

laidlaw.ae

305 ms

laidlaw-group.co.uk

1666 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

106 ms

style.min.css

208 ms

styles.css

290 ms

Our browser made a total of 93 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 8% of them (7 requests) were addressed to the original Laidlaw.ae, 87% (81 requests) were made to Laidlaw-group.co.uk and 4% (4 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.7 sec) relates to the external source Laidlaw-group.co.uk.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 297.5 kB (24%)

Content Size

1.2 MB

After Optimization

947.0 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Laidlaw.ae 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. 75% of websites need less resources to load and that’s why Accessify’s recommendations for optimization and resource minification can be helpful for this project. Images take 506.1 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-85%

Potential reduce by 144.4 kB

  • Original 169.3 kB
  • After minification 166.7 kB
  • After compression 24.9 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. 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 144.4 kB or 85% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-7%

Potential reduce by 33.9 kB

  • Original 506.1 kB
  • After minification 472.2 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. Laidlaw images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-20%

Potential reduce by 70.6 kB

  • Original 352.9 kB
  • After minification 352.9 kB
  • After compression 282.4 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 70.6 kB or 20% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-22%

Potential reduce by 48.6 kB

  • Original 216.0 kB
  • After minification 210.3 kB
  • After compression 167.4 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. Laidlaw.ae needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 48.6 kB or 22% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 64 (80%)

Requests Now

80

After Optimization

16

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 80 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Laidlaw. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 37 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 29 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

laidlaw.ae

laidlaw.ae

305 ms

laidlaw-group.co.uk

laidlaw-group.co.uk

1666 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

wp-emoji-release.min.js

106 ms

style.min.css

style.min.css

208 ms

styles.css

styles.css

290 ms

rgs.css

rgs.css

288 ms

font-awesome.min.css

font-awesome.min.css

293 ms

style.css

style.css

485 ms

magnific.css

magnific.css

290 ms

responsive.css

responsive.css

317 ms

css

css

38 ms

nectar-slider.css

nectar-slider.css

391 ms

js_composer.min.css

js_composer.min.css

524 ms

um-fonticons-ii.css

um-fonticons-ii.css

393 ms

um-fonticons-fa.css

um-fonticons-fa.css

395 ms

select2.css

select2.css

418 ms

um-crop.css

um-crop.css

530 ms

um-modal.css

um-modal.css

531 ms

um-styles.css

um-styles.css

532 ms

um-members.css

um-members.css

533 ms

um-profile.css

um-profile.css

584 ms

um-account.css

um-account.css

588 ms

um-misc.css

um-misc.css

591 ms

um-fileupload.css

um-fileupload.css

592 ms

default.css

default.css

595 ms

default.date.css

default.date.css

619 ms

default.time.css

default.time.css

685 ms

um-raty.css

um-raty.css

688 ms

simplebar.css

simplebar.css

690 ms

um-tipsy.css

um-tipsy.css

691 ms

um-responsive.css

um-responsive.css

695 ms

um-old-default.css

um-old-default.css

718 ms

jquery.js

jquery.js

795 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

788 ms

modernizr.js

modernizr.js

791 ms

um-gdpr.min.js

um-gdpr.min.js

791 ms

scripts.js

scripts.js

792 ms

magnific.js

magnific.js

977 ms

superfish.js

superfish.js

978 ms

init.js

init.js

1076 ms

nectar-slider.js

nectar-slider.js

800 ms

touchswipe.min.js

touchswipe.min.js

699 ms

select2.min.js

select2.min.js

698 ms

underscore.min.js

underscore.min.js

694 ms

wp-util.min.js

wp-util.min.js

713 ms

um-crop.min.js

um-crop.min.js

684 ms

um-modal.min.js

um-modal.min.js

625 ms

um-jquery-form.min.js

um-jquery-form.min.js

643 ms

um-fileupload.min.js

um-fileupload.min.js

721 ms

picker.js

picker.js

701 ms

picker.date.js

picker.date.js

597 ms

picker.time.js

picker.time.js

589 ms

legacy.js

legacy.js

607 ms

um-raty.min.js

um-raty.min.js

683 ms

um-tipsy.min.js

um-tipsy.min.js

688 ms

imagesloaded.min.js

imagesloaded.min.js

687 ms

masonry.min.js

masonry.min.js

640 ms

jquery.masonry.min.js

jquery.masonry.min.js

648 ms

simplebar.min.js

simplebar.min.js

694 ms

um-functions.min.js

um-functions.min.js

724 ms

um-responsive.min.js

um-responsive.min.js

726 ms

um-conditional.min.js

um-conditional.min.js

703 ms

um-scripts.min.js

um-scripts.min.js

638 ms

um-members.min.js

um-members.min.js

642 ms

um-profile.min.js

um-profile.min.js

695 ms

um-account.min.js

um-account.min.js

725 ms

wp-embed.min.js

wp-embed.min.js

725 ms

js_composer_front.min.js

js_composer_front.min.js

696 ms

2023-LOGO-for-Website.png

2023-LOGO-for-Website.png

489 ms

output-onlinepngtools-7.png

output-onlinepngtools-7.png

497 ms

2023-LOGO-for-Website-1.jpg

2023-LOGO-for-Website-1.jpg

867 ms

2023-LOGO-for-Website-1.png

2023-LOGO-for-Website-1.png

867 ms

Footer.png

Footer.png

814 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

46 ms

OpenSans-Regular-webfont.woff

OpenSans-Regular-webfont.woff

805 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

76 ms

OpenSans-Light-webfont.woff

OpenSans-Light-webfont.woff

805 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsgH1x4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsgH1x4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

97 ms

OpenSans-Semibold-webfont.woff

OpenSans-Semibold-webfont.woff

804 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4uaVcUwaEQXjM.ttf

96 ms

OpenSansBold-webfont.woff

OpenSansBold-webfont.woff

805 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

806 ms

fontawesome-webfont.svg

fontawesome-webfont.svg

835 ms

icomoon.woff

icomoon.woff

793 ms

slide_2-1.jpg

slide_2-1.jpg

278 ms

diagonal_line.png

diagonal_line.png

132 ms

grid.png

grid.png

132 ms

slide_3.jpg

slide_3.jpg

380 ms

slide_4.jpg

slide_4.jpg

465 ms

slide_5-1.jpg

slide_5-1.jpg

466 ms

slide_6-1.jpg

slide_6-1.jpg

493 ms

slide_1-1.jpg

slide_1-1.jpg

399 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

195 ms

Accessibility Review

laidlaw.ae accessibility score

86

Accessibility Issues

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

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

laidlaw.ae 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

High

Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript

SEO Factors

laidlaw.ae SEO score

86

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

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Laidlaw.ae 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 Laidlaw.ae 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

laidlaw.ae

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