2.3 sec in total
51 ms
1.7 sec
543 ms
Click here to check amazing Response Point content for India. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about responsepoint.com
RightLeads creates ICP-aligned company & contact data infused with GTM intel and maximizes sales rep efficiency with human data assistants.
Visit responsepoint.comWe analyzed Responsepoint.com page load time and found that the first response time was 51 ms and then it took 2.3 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 40% of websites can load faster.
responsepoint.com performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value3.6 s
31/100
10%
Value5.8 s
15/100
25%
Value11.9 s
4/100
10%
Value10,260 ms
0/100
30%
Value0.605
10/100
15%
Value16.6 s
5/100
10%
51 ms
894 ms
22 ms
35 ms
58 ms
Our browser made a total of 65 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 25% of them (16 requests) were addressed to the original Responsepoint.com, 58% (38 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 5% (3 requests) were made to Google-analytics.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (894 ms) belongs to the original domain Responsepoint.com.
Page size can be reduced by 252.2 kB (32%)
800.6 kB
548.3 kB
In fact, the total size of Responsepoint.com main page is 800.6 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. 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 491.2 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 243.3 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 243.3 kB or 85% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 8.8 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. Response Point images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 152 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.
Number of requests can be reduced by 9 (38%)
24
15
The browser has sent 24 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Response Point. 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 as a result speed up the page load time.
responsepoint.com
51 ms
www.responsepoint.com
894 ms
SMwHaIckpBfuUfWIF91JWns7MVo.js
22 ms
2080bdbd3340b553bb7a47adf3f5e6b3.css
35 ms
analytics.js
58 ms
collect
14 ms
collect
33 ms
addthis_widget.js
161 ms
Logo_ResponsePoint_w-tag.png
204 ms
S6uyw4BMUTPHjxAwWA.woff
200 ms
S6uyw4BMUTPHjxAwWw.ttf
281 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh7USSwaPHw.woff
381 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh7USSwaPHA.ttf
417 ms
S6u8w4BMUTPHh30AUi-s.woff
380 ms
S6u8w4BMUTPHh30AUi-v.ttf
380 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh6UVSwaPHw.woff
380 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh6UVSwaPHA.ttf
415 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh50XSwaPHw.woff
444 ms
S6u9w4BMUTPHh50XSwaPHA.ttf
448 ms
js
206 ms
lazyload.min.js
25 ms
83468fbfb71330039877691b026b0db2.js
92 ms
modules.ttf
88 ms
email-decode.min.js
84 ms
moatframe.js
172 ms
rp-header_main_bg@2x.png
222 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI5wq_FQfr.woff
205 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI5wq_FQfo.ttf
204 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI3wi_FQfr.woff
204 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI3wi_FQfo.ttf
208 ms
S6u8w4BMUTPHjxsAUi-s.woff
239 ms
S6u8w4BMUTPHjxsAUi-v.ttf
281 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI9w2_FQfr.woff
238 ms
S6u_w4BMUTPHjxsI9w2_FQfo.ttf
239 ms
S6u-w4BMUTPHjxsIPx-mPCQ.woff
238 ms
S6u-w4BMUTPHjxsIPx-mPCc.ttf
238 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtZ6Hw3aXw.woff
284 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtZ6Hw3aX8.ttf
283 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtr6Hw3aXw.woff
284 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtr6Hw3aX8.ttf
283 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCs16Hw3aXw.woff
283 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCs16Hw3aX8.ttf
284 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvr6Hw3aXw.woff
285 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvr6Hw3aX8.ttf
288 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtr6Xw3aXw.woff
287 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCtr6Xw3aX8.ttf
287 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCu173w3aXw.woff
288 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCu173w3aX8.ttf
297 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCuM73w3aXw.woff
297 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCuM73w3aX8.ttf
296 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvr73w3aXw.woff
295 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvr73w3aX8.ttf
295 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvC73w3aXw.woff
295 ms
_ate.track.config_resp
333 ms
300lo.json
327 ms
sh.f48a1a04fe8dbf021b4cda1d.html
145 ms
rp-header_main.png
142 ms
skyscrapers-1081737_1920_CC0.jpg
324 ms
New-Normal-400x250.jpg
500 ms
PR-Header_700-1-400x200.jpg
258 ms
linkedin-Pick-up-the-phone-700-x-400-400x250.png
206 ms
submit-spin.svg
481 ms
JTUHjIg1_i6t8kCHKm4532VJOt5-QNFgpCvC73w3aX8.ttf
265 ms
collect
77 ms
collect
97 ms
responsepoint.com 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
No form fields have multiple labels
Navigation
These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.
Impact
Issue
Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order
Best practices
These items highlight common accessibility best practices.
Impact
Issue
[user-scalable="no"] is used in the <meta name="viewport"> element or the [maximum-scale] attribute is less than 5.
responsepoint.com best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
Browser errors were logged to the console
Page has valid source maps
Issues were logged in the Issues panel in Chrome Devtools
responsepoint.com SEO score
Content Best Practices
Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.
Impact
Issue
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
Document uses legible font sizes
EN
EN
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Responsepoint.com 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 Responsepoint.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.
responsepoint.com
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Response Point. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: