26 sec in total
2.3 sec
23.3 sec
363 ms
Click here to check amazing Comparison Sbm content for India. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about comparison.sbm.pw
iPt.pw is an open source content management system that lets you easily <a href='http://iPt.pw'>create your own user-powered website</a>.
Visit comparison.sbm.pwWe analyzed Comparison.sbm.pw page load time and found that the first response time was 2.3 sec and then it took 23.7 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is an excellent result, as only a small number of websites can load faster. Unfortunately, there were 3 request timeouts, which can generally increase the web page load time, as the browser stays idle while waiting for website response.
comparison.sbm.pw performance score
name
value
score
weighting
Value2.5 s
66/100
10%
Value6.4 s
9/100
25%
Value10.7 s
7/100
10%
Value1,670 ms
11/100
30%
Value0
100/100
15%
Value11.0 s
21/100
10%
2338 ms
422 ms
314 ms
321 ms
318 ms
Our browser made a total of 48 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 38% of them (18 requests) were addressed to the original Comparison.sbm.pw, 13% (6 requests) were made to C.amazon-adsystem.com and 10% (5 requests) were made to Google-analytics.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (20.1 sec) relates to the external source Ir-in.amazon-adsystem.com.
Page size can be reduced by 103.5 kB (36%)
284.6 kB
181.1 kB
In fact, the total size of Comparison.sbm.pw main page is 284.6 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. Javascripts take 137.1 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.
Potential reduce by 85.5 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. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 19.7 kB, which is 19% of the original size. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 85.5 kB or 83% of the original size.
Potential reduce by 534 B
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. Comparison Sbm images are well optimized though.
Potential reduce by 6.4 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. This website has mostly compressed JavaScripts.
Potential reduce by 11.0 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. Comparison.sbm.pw needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 11.0 kB or 28% of the original size.
Number of requests can be reduced by 23 (59%)
39
16
The browser has sent 39 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Comparison Sbm. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 18 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 7 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.
comparison.sbm.pw
2338 ms
bootstrap.no-icons.min.css
422 ms
bootstrap-theme.min.css
314 ms
font-awesome.min.css
321 ms
jquery.pnotify.css
318 ms
style.css
17 ms
modernizr.js
314 ms
jquery.min.js
25 ms
custom.js
315 ms
js
86 ms
email-decode.min.js
315 ms
assoc.js
17 ms
my-style.css
309 ms
assoc.js
15 ms
snippet.js
24 ms
jquery-ui.min.js
7 ms
jquery-ui.css
10 ms
registration_verify.js
510 ms
bootstrap.min.js
511 ms
bootstrap-fileupload.js
511 ms
jquery.pnotify.min.js
480 ms
analytics.js
50 ms
gtm.js
51 ms
125170_32.jpg
210 ms
Avatar_32.png
221 ms
123727_32.jpg
270 ms
gtm.js
97 ms
js
115 ms
collect
69 ms
fontawesome-webfont.woff
353 ms
getad
383 ms
collect
46 ms
collect
38 ms
collect
22 ms
collect
22 ms
collect
22 ms
assoc_lra.html
4 ms
getad
88 ms
assoc_lra.html
5 ms
ir
20084 ms
assoc_lra_s1_in_728x90.gif
2 ms
assoc_lra_s1_in_728x90.gif
6 ms
iu3
62 ms
getad
87 ms
ir
19972 ms
iu3
13 ms
ir
19879 ms
iu3
14 ms
comparison.sbm.pw 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
Image elements do not have [alt] attributes
Form elements do not have associated labels
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
Some elements have a [tabindex] value greater than 0
comparison.sbm.pw best practices score
Trust and Safety
Impact
Issue
Does not use HTTPS
Includes front-end JavaScript libraries with known security vulnerabilities
Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks
User Experience
Impact
Issue
Serves images with low resolution
General
Impact
Issue
Detected JavaScript libraries
Browser errors were logged to the console
Issues were logged in the Issues panel in Chrome Devtools
comparison.sbm.pw SEO score
Content Best Practices
Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.
Impact
Issue
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
Document doesn't use legible font sizes
Tap targets are not sized appropriately
EN
EN
UTF-8
Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Comparison.sbm.pw 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 Comparison.sbm.pw 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.
comparison.sbm.pw
Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Comparison Sbm. 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: