4.2 sec in total
1.8 sec
2.3 sec
82 ms
Welcome to rock.fo homepage info - get ready to check Rock best content right away, or after learning these important things about rock.fo
Quality trawl-doors for the global fishing industry
Visit rock.foWe analyzed Rock.fo page load time and found that the first response time was 1.8 sec and then it took 2.4 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 45% of websites can load faster.
rock.fo performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value2.1 s
81/100
10%
Value5.3 s
21/100
25%
Value9.2 s
13/100
10%
Value1,320 ms
17/100
30%
Value0.005
100/100
15%
Value12.3 s
15/100
10%
1780 ms
32 ms
33 ms
87 ms
29 ms
Our browser made a total of 43 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 2% of them (1 request) were addressed to the original Rock.fo, 33% (14 requests) were made to Static.wixstatic.com and 30% (13 requests) were made to Static.parastorage.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (1.8 sec) belongs to the original domain Rock.fo.
Page size can be reduced by 431.1 kB (53%)
806.6 kB
375.5 kB
In fact, the total size of Rock.fo main page is 806.6 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. 40% of websites need less resources to load. HTML takes 541.1 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 424.7 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 424.7 kB or 78% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 3.6 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. Rock images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 2.8 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.
Number of requests can be reduced by 16 (53%)
30
14
The browser has sent 30 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Rock. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 12 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.
www.rock.fo
1780 ms
originTrials.41d7301a.bundle.min.js
32 ms
minified.js
33 ms
focus-within-polyfill.js
87 ms
polyfill.min.js
29 ms
1ef765_8a22fc12fac24972a830f12eacdbafaa.png
38 ms
bundle.min.js
23 ms
1ef765_64818884cede4f02ab2bd4d853a59c60.png
16 ms
1ef765_64818884cede4f02ab2bd4d853a59c60.png
17 ms
1ef765_d3ec2c7d27e245d1b2e000173909f109~mv2.png
16 ms
1ef765_8a22fc12fac24972a830f12eacdbafaa.png
17 ms
1ef765_4e21cde94b1a4d7faded8c24c4741ec1.jpg
18 ms
393130_d3cca89270cd420499ba6f37981284ff~mv2.jpg
15 ms
393130_d3cca89270cd420499ba6f37981284ff~mv2.jpg
20 ms
393130_7cf90e1bf6b5495bbe976b5985389300~mv2.jpg
20 ms
393130_7cf90e1bf6b5495bbe976b5985389300~mv2.jpg
20 ms
1ef765_25d7ddeb47564281bdf357913376cbfa~mv2.png
250 ms
1ef765_ba9dd019c36a4a0ba5f2c37a33bb2df4~mv2.jpg
20 ms
1ef765_e58a6d419d8a410bab41aac3b9f0a9c3.jpg
324 ms
1ef765_d3ec2c7d27e245d1b2e000173909f109~mv2.png
52 ms
200 ms
194 ms
thunderbolt-commons.587aa77c.bundle.min.js
70 ms
main.317a27be.bundle.min.js
69 ms
lodash.min.js
69 ms
react.production.min.js
103 ms
react-dom.production.min.js
103 ms
siteTags.bundle.min.js
102 ms
wix-perf-measure.umd.min.js
131 ms
153 ms
149 ms
150 ms
141 ms
186 ms
155 ms
154 ms
133 ms
123 ms
98 ms
deprecation-en.v5.html
11 ms
bolt-performance
33 ms
deprecation-style.v5.css
8 ms
right-arrow.svg
9 ms
rock.fo 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
Links do not have a discernible name
Navigation
These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.
Impact
Issue
Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order
rock.fo 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
Page has valid source maps
rock.fo 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
Tap targets are not sized appropriately
EN
DA
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Rock.fo can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and it does not match the claimed Danish language. Our system also found out that Rock.fo 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.
rock.fo
Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Rock. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: