Report Summary

  • 11

    Performance

    Renders faster than
    24% of other websites

  • 72

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 38% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    36% of websites

  • 92

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    75% of websites

worth.com

Worth - Worth Beyond Wealth

Page Load Speed

1.5 sec in total

First Response

14 ms

Resources Loaded

720 ms

Page Rendered

778 ms

worth.com screenshot

About Website

Visit worth.com now to see the best up-to-date Worth content for United States and also check out these interesting facts you probably never knew about worth.com

Worth Beyond Wealth

Visit worth.com

Key Findings

We analyzed Worth.com page load time and found that the first response time was 14 ms and then it took 1.5 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is quite a good result, as only 30% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

worth.com performance score

11

Measured Metrics

name

value

score

weighting

FCP (First Contentful Paint)

Value4.8 s

11/100

10%

LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)

Value15.5 s

0/100

25%

SI (Speed Index)

Value9.2 s

13/100

10%

TBT (Total Blocking Time)

Value2,980 ms

3/100

30%

CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)

Value0.238

52/100

15%

TTI (Time to Interactive)

Value21.1 s

1/100

10%

Network Requests Diagram

worth.com

14 ms

www.worth.com

202 ms

css

34 ms

A.main.css,qv=4.pagespeed.cf.1Eh8jhg5vN.css

15 ms

main-d665a5a9b387391f0ab8.js

55 ms

Our browser made a total of 37 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 65% of them (24 requests) were addressed to the original Worth.com, 8% (3 requests) were made to Tpc.googlesyndication.com and 5% (2 requests) were made to Google-analytics.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (228 ms) relates to the external source Static.hotjar.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 1.6 MB (31%)

Content Size

5.1 MB

After Optimization

3.5 MB

In fact, the total size of Worth.com main page is 5.1 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. 80% of websites need less resources to load and that’s why Accessify’s recommendations for optimization and resource minification can be helpful for this project. Images take 3.2 MB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-80%

Potential reduce by 33.4 kB

  • Original 41.6 kB
  • After minification 41.6 kB
  • After compression 8.2 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 33.4 kB or 80% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-1%

Potential reduce by 42.8 kB

  • Original 3.2 MB
  • After minification 3.2 MB

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. Worth images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-84%

Potential reduce by 1.3 MB

  • Original 1.5 MB
  • After minification 893.3 kB
  • After compression 241.3 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 1.3 MB or 84% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 195.8 kB

  • Original 235.1 kB
  • After minification 234.7 kB
  • After compression 39.3 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. Worth.com needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 195.8 kB or 83% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 7 (22%)

Requests Now

32

After Optimization

25

The browser has sent 32 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Worth. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 8 to 1 for JavaScripts and as a result speed up the page load time.

Accessibility Review

worth.com accessibility score

72

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

Buttons do not have an accessible name

High

Form elements do not have associated labels

High

Links do not have a discernible name

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.

Navigation

These are opportunities to improve keyboard navigation in your application.

Impact

Issue

High

[id] attributes on active, focusable elements are not unique

High

Heading elements are not in a sequentially-descending order

ARIA

These are opportunities to improve the usage of ARIA in your application which may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

ARIA IDs are not unique

Best Practices

worth.com best practices score

75

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

Browser errors were logged to the console

High

Page has valid source maps

SEO Factors

worth.com SEO score

92

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

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

    EN

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

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