Tools & Wizards About Us
reviewbiology.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 49

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    67% of other websites

  • 73

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 38% of websites

  • 83

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    55% of websites

  • 83

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    46% of websites

reviewbiology.com

Living Environment Regents Review | Biology Regents Review | Regents Prep

Page Load Speed

1 sec in total

First Response

36 ms

Resources Loaded

757 ms

Page Rendered

229 ms

reviewbiology.com screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Review Biology content for United States. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about reviewbiology.com

Living Environment Regents Review tools to help you study for the living environment regents 2022. Fun, interactive living environment regents review / biology regents tools that focus on regents prep...

Visit reviewbiology.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Reviewbiology.com page load time and found that the first response time was 36 ms and then it took 986 ms to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 20% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

reviewbiology.com performance score

49

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value2.1 s

81/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value3.6 s

62/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value4.3 s

76/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value2,620 ms

4/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.048

99/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value12.5 s

14/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

reviewbiology.com

36 ms

reviewbiology.com

40 ms

jquery.min.js

20 ms

jquery.dropotron.min.js

36 ms

jquery.slidertron.min.js

34 ms

Our browser made a total of 36 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 61% of them (22 requests) were addressed to the original Reviewbiology.com, 14% (5 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com and 8% (3 requests) were made to Static.addtoany.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (448 ms) relates to the external source Pagead2.googlesyndication.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 372.5 kB (46%)

Content Size

810.5 kB

After Optimization

438.0 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Reviewbiology.com main page is 810.5 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. 35% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 683.6 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-77%

Potential reduce by 23.3 kB

  • Original 30.4 kB
  • After minification 30.4 kB
  • After compression 7.1 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 23.3 kB or 77% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 1.1 kB

  • Original 91.5 kB
  • After minification 90.3 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. Review Biology images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-51%

Potential reduce by 345.9 kB

  • Original 683.6 kB
  • After minification 683.6 kB
  • After compression 337.7 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 345.9 kB or 51% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-41%

Potential reduce by 2.1 kB

  • Original 5.0 kB
  • After minification 3.1 kB
  • After compression 3.0 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. Reviewbiology.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 2.1 kB or 41% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 16 (55%)

Requests Now

29

After Optimization

13

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 29 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Review Biology. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 13 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 5 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

reviewbiology.com

reviewbiology.com

36 ms

reviewbiology.com

reviewbiology.com

40 ms

jquery.min.js

jquery.min.js

20 ms

jquery.dropotron.min.js

jquery.dropotron.min.js

36 ms

jquery.slidertron.min.js

jquery.slidertron.min.js

34 ms

skel.min.js

skel.min.js

35 ms

skel-layers.min.js

skel-layers.min.js

32 ms

init.js

init.js

32 ms

skel.css

skel.css

32 ms

style.css

style.css

43 ms

style-desktop.css

style-desktop.css

43 ms

js

js

66 ms

adsbygoogle.js

adsbygoogle.js

164 ms

page.js

page.js

51 ms

counter.js

counter.js

42 ms

css

css

40 ms

font-awesome.min.css

font-awesome.min.css

11 ms

bg01.jpg

bg01.jpg

69 ms

t.php

t.php

141 ms

rgz-logo-2020-180x180.jpg

rgz-logo-2020-180x180.jpg

71 ms

left-icon-q.jpg

left-icon-q.jpg

70 ms

list-2.jpg

list-2.jpg

70 ms

Test.jpg

Test.jpg

72 ms

Folder-Websites-icon.png

Folder-Websites-icon.png

69 ms

book.jpg

book.jpg

75 ms

pdf-icon.png

pdf-icon.png

74 ms

1302736763_biology.png

1302736763_biology.png

75 ms

sm.25.html

sm.25.html

72 ms

eso.D0Uc7kY6.js

eso.D0Uc7kY6.js

75 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsjZ0B4gaVc.ttf

69 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsiH0B4gaVc.ttf

70 ms

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4gaVc.ttf

memSYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVZyOOSr4dVJWUgsg-1x4gaVc.ttf

72 ms

show_ads_impl.js

show_ads_impl.js

448 ms

main.js

main.js

21 ms

rax5HieDvtMOe0iICsUccChdu0o.ttf

rax5HieDvtMOe0iICsUccChdu0o.ttf

6 ms

raxkHieDvtMOe0iICsUccCDmnlrf0T4.ttf

raxkHieDvtMOe0iICsUccCDmnlrf0T4.ttf

6 ms

Accessibility Review

reviewbiology.com accessibility score

73

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.

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

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

Image elements do not have [alt] attributes

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

reviewbiology.com 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

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

reviewbiology.com SEO score

83

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Crawling and Indexing

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

Impact

Issue

High

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

High

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

High

Document uses legible font sizes

High

Tap targets are not sized appropriately

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    N/A

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Reviewbiology.com can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and neither this language nor any other was claimed in <html> or <meta> tags. Our system also found out that Reviewbiology.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

reviewbiology.com

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