Report Summary

  • 66

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    79% of other websites

  • 85

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 60% of websites

  • 92

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    81% of websites

  • 67

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    25% of websites

Page Load Speed

299 ms in total

First Response

83 ms

Resources Loaded

165 ms

Page Rendered

51 ms

whathavewedone.com screenshot

About Website

Click here to check amazing Whathavewedone content. Otherwise, check out these important facts you probably never knew about whathavewedone.com

Visit whathavewedone.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Whathavewedone.com page load time and found that the first response time was 83 ms and then it took 216 ms 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.

Performance Metrics

whathavewedone.com performance score

66

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value1.6 s

95/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value5.1 s

24/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value3.8 s

83/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value360 ms

72/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.098

90/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value5.8 s

66/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

whathavewedone.com

83 ms

forwarder.f9a22649.js

19 ms

Our browser made a total of 2 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 50% of them (1 request) were addressed to the original Whathavewedone.com, 50% (1 request) were made to Img1.wsimg.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (83 ms) belongs to the original domain Whathavewedone.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 9.1 kB (69%)

Content Size

13.3 kB

After Optimization

4.2 kB

In fact, the total size of Whathavewedone.com main page is 13.3 kB. This result falls within a vast category (top 1 000 000) of heavyweight, probably not optimized, and thus slow loading web pages. Only a small number of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 13.0 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-26%

Potential reduce by 80 B

  • Original 312 B
  • After minification 312 B
  • After compression 232 B

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 80 B or 26% of the original size.

JavaScript Optimization

-70%

Potential reduce by 9.0 kB

  • Original 13.0 kB
  • After minification 13.0 kB
  • After compression 4.0 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 9.0 kB or 70% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

We found no issues to fix!

Requests Now

1

After Optimization

1

The browser has sent 1 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Whathavewedone. According to our analytics all requests are already optimized.

Accessibility Review

whathavewedone.com accessibility score

85

Accessibility Issues

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

Document doesn't have a <title> element

High

<frame> or <iframe> elements do not have a title

Best Practices

whathavewedone.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

General

Impact

Issue

Low

Detected JavaScript libraries

High

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

whathavewedone.com SEO score

67

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Content Best Practices

Format your HTML in a way that enables crawlers to better understand your app’s content.

Impact

Issue

High

Document doesn't have a <title> element

Crawling and Indexing

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

Impact

Issue

High

Page is blocked from indexing

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 doesn't use legible font sizes

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 Whathavewedone.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 Whathavewedone.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

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