2.2 sec in total
591 ms
1.1 sec
545 ms
Visit lowbagger.org now to see the best up-to-date Lowbagger content and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about lowbagger.org
Visit lowbagger.orgWe analyzed Lowbagger.org page load time and found that the first response time was 591 ms and then it took 1.6 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 30% of websites can load faster.
lowbagger.org performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value2.6 s
65/100
10%
Value3.0 s
78/100
25%
Value2.6 s
97/100
10%
Value150 ms
95/100
30%
Value0.014
100/100
15%
Value3.3 s
94/100
10%
591 ms
89 ms
92 ms
61 ms
90 ms
Our browser made a total of 23 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 87% of them (20 requests) were addressed to the original Lowbagger.org, 9% (2 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 4% (1 request) were made to Fonts.googleapis.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (591 ms) belongs to the original domain Lowbagger.org.
Page size can be reduced by 169.0 kB (67%)
252.1 kB
83.0 kB
In fact, the total size of Lowbagger.org main page is 252.1 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. 20% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 133.8 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 7.5 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 7.5 kB or 71% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 17.2 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. Obviously, Lowbagger needs image optimization as it can save up to 17.2 kB or 45% of the original volume. The most popular and efficient tools for JPEG and PNG image optimization are Jpegoptim and PNG Crush.
Potential reduce by 87.6 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 87.6 kB or 65% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 56.7 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. Lowbagger.org needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 56.7 kB or 82% of the original size.
Number of requests can be reduced by 12 (63%)
19
7
The browser has sent 19 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Lowbagger. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 10 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 4 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
lowbagger.org
591 ms
wp-emoji-release.min.js
89 ms
style.css
92 ms
vegas.min.css
61 ms
font-awesome.min.css
90 ms
css
35 ms
jquery.js
154 ms
jquery-migrate.min.js
61 ms
jquery.fitvids.js
88 ms
fitvids-doc-ready.js
93 ms
vegas.min.js
108 ms
base.js
109 ms
navigation.js
96 ms
skip-link-focus-fix.js
100 ms
comment-reply.min.js
103 ms
rainbow.png
79 ms
logo.png
80 ms
search-button-bg.png
82 ms
divider.png
80 ms
widget_bottom.png
93 ms
cJZKeOuBrn4kERxqtaUH3T8E0i7KZn-EPnyo3HZu7kw.woff
98 ms
k3k702ZOKiLJc3WVjuplzHhCUOGz7vYGh680lGh-uXM.woff
98 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
98 ms
lowbagger.org accessibility score
Contrast
These are opportunities to improve the legibility of your content.
Impact
Issue
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
<frame> or <iframe> elements do not have a title
lowbagger.org best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
lowbagger.org SEO score
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
N/A
EN
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Lowbagger.org 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), while the claimed language is English. Our system also found out that Lowbagger.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.
lowbagger.org
Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Lowbagger. 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: