Tools & Wizards About Us
whartonjournal.com screenshot

Report Summary

  • 81

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    87% of other websites

  • 90

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 75% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    81% of websites

  • 67

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    25% of websites

whartonjournal.com

Page Load Speed

3 sec in total

First Response

692 ms

Resources Loaded

1.9 sec

Page Rendered

425 ms

whartonjournal.com screenshot

About Website

Welcome to whartonjournal.com homepage info - get ready to check Whartonjournal best content for United States right away, or after learning these important things about whartonjournal.com

University of Pennsylvania

Visit whartonjournal.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Whartonjournal.com page load time and found that the first response time was 692 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.

Performance Metrics

whartonjournal.com performance score

81

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value0.9 s

100/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value2.7 s

84/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value1.3 s

100/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value600 ms

50/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0

100/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value2.1 s

99/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

whartonjournal.com

692 ms

ga.js

27 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

86 ms

flick.css

129 ms

whartonjournal.com

200 ms

Our browser made a total of 67 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 79% of them (53 requests) were addressed to the original Whartonjournal.com, 4% (3 requests) were made to Google-analytics.com and 4% (3 requests) were made to Fonts.gstatic.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (692 ms) belongs to the original domain Whartonjournal.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 585.4 kB (34%)

Content Size

1.7 MB

After Optimization

1.1 MB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Whartonjournal.com main page is 1.7 MB. This result falls beyond the top 1M of websites and identifies a large and not optimized web page that may take ages to load. 50% of websites need less resources to load. Images take 1.0 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 63.6 kB

  • Original 76.4 kB
  • After minification 57.9 kB
  • After compression 12.8 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 18.5 kB, which is 24% 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 63.6 kB or 83% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-7%

Potential reduce by 74.4 kB

  • Original 1.0 MB
  • After minification 967.4 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. Whartonjournal images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-67%

Potential reduce by 214.3 kB

  • Original 319.8 kB
  • After minification 279.0 kB
  • After compression 105.6 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 214.3 kB or 67% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 233.1 kB

  • Original 280.6 kB
  • After minification 273.3 kB
  • After compression 47.5 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. Whartonjournal.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 233.1 kB or 83% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 24 (41%)

Requests Now

59

After Optimization

35

  • AJAX
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 59 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Whartonjournal. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 15 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 11 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

whartonjournal.com

whartonjournal.com

692 ms

ga.js

ga.js

27 ms

wp-emoji-release.min.js

wp-emoji-release.min.js

86 ms

flick.css

flick.css

129 ms

whartonjournal.com

whartonjournal.com

200 ms

styles.css

styles.css

122 ms

default.css

default.css

150 ms

dw-focus.min.css

dw-focus.min.css

251 ms

dw-focus-responsive.min.css

dw-focus-responsive.min.css

157 ms

style.css

style.css

178 ms

style.css

style.css

184 ms

attachment_widget.css

attachment_widget.css

224 ms

jquery.js

jquery.js

234 ms

jquery-migrate.min.js

jquery-migrate.min.js

235 ms

scrollTo.js

scrollTo.js

245 ms

jquery.form.min.js

jquery.form.min.js

265 ms

mailchimp.js

mailchimp.js

320 ms

core.min.js

core.min.js

320 ms

datepicker.js

datepicker.js

324 ms

jquery.mouse.move.js

jquery.mouse.move.js

324 ms

jquery.swipe.js

jquery.swipe.js

329 ms

jquery.infinitescroll.min.js

jquery.infinitescroll.min.js

329 ms

dw-focus.min.js

dw-focus.min.js

383 ms

scripts.js

scripts.js

371 ms

__utm.gif

__utm.gif

11 ms

collect

collect

54 ms

css

css

38 ms

css

css

50 ms

__utm.gif

__utm.gif

47 ms

Logo8.jpg

Logo8.jpg

200 ms

glyphicons-halflings.png

glyphicons-halflings.png

163 ms

dot-ddd.gif

dot-ddd.gif

165 ms

unnamed-520x215.jpg

unnamed-520x215.jpg

164 ms

Image-2-e1456865205944-520x400.jpg

Image-2-e1456865205944-520x400.jpg

168 ms

millennial-economy-520x375.jpg

millennial-economy-520x375.jpg

165 ms

Screen-Shot-2016-02-27-at-5.28.33-PM-520x400.png

Screen-Shot-2016-02-27-at-5.28.33-PM-520x400.png

406 ms

2-broke-girls-walking-dead-520x375.jpg

2-broke-girls-walking-dead-520x375.jpg

191 ms

unnamed-230x78.jpg

unnamed-230x78.jpg

298 ms

Image-2-e1456865205944-173x130.jpg

Image-2-e1456865205944-173x130.jpg

227 ms

millennial-economy-182x130.jpg

millennial-economy-182x130.jpg

275 ms

Screen-Shot-2016-02-27-at-5.28.33-PM-192x130.png

Screen-Shot-2016-02-27-at-5.28.33-PM-192x130.png

302 ms

2-broke-girls-walking-dead-182x130.jpg

2-broke-girls-walking-dead-182x130.jpg

276 ms

ex1-195x130.jpg

ex1-195x130.jpg

295 ms

roe2-173x130.jpg

roe2-173x130.jpg

356 ms

Screenshot-2016-02-16-00.41.51-212x130.png

Screenshot-2016-02-16-00.41.51-212x130.png

362 ms

Emily-Chau-web-196x130.jpg

Emily-Chau-web-196x130.jpg

361 ms

Screenshot-2016-02-15-21.41.26-168x130.png

Screenshot-2016-02-15-21.41.26-168x130.png

376 ms

Dagne-Dover-May-2012-Logo2-300x231.jpg

Dagne-Dover-May-2012-Logo2-300x231.jpg

359 ms

cube-194x130.png

cube-194x130.png

507 ms

gcc-173x130.png

gcc-173x130.png

422 ms

paris-194x130.jpg

paris-194x130.jpg

422 ms

penndesign-194x130.png

penndesign-194x130.png

427 ms

arrow-right-222.png

arrow-right-222.png

426 ms

Mobile-Logo-4.jpg

Mobile-Logo-4.jpg

433 ms

arrow-top-white.png

arrow-top-white.png

453 ms

rRnY1PEvm8fHngJkZm5BIA.ttf

rRnY1PEvm8fHngJkZm5BIA.ttf

131 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

512 ms

Novecentowide-Bold-webfont.woff

Novecentowide-Bold-webfont.woff

467 ms

Novecentowide-Normal-webfont.woff

Novecentowide-Normal-webfont.woff

499 ms

2hig-tnMw8lXZsjwuh-9ow.ttf

2hig-tnMw8lXZsjwuh-9ow.ttf

131 ms

evC1haE-MsorTl_A7_uSGaCWcynf_cDxXwCLxiixG1c.ttf

evC1haE-MsorTl_A7_uSGaCWcynf_cDxXwCLxiixG1c.ttf

132 ms

all.js

all.js

271 ms

qWbgI.gif

qWbgI.gif

40 ms

ajax-loader.gif

ajax-loader.gif

358 ms

121 ms

xd_arbiter.php

xd_arbiter.php

227 ms

xd_arbiter.php

xd_arbiter.php

422 ms

Accessibility Review

whartonjournal.com accessibility score

90

Accessibility Issues

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

Best Practices

whartonjournal.com best practices score

92

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

SEO Factors

whartonjournal.com SEO score

67

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    N/A

  • Language Claimed

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Whartonjournal.com 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 Whartonjournal.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

whartonjournal.com

Open Graph data is detected on the main page of Whartonjournal. This is the best way to make the web page social media friendly. Here is how it looks like on Facebook: