Insights

Google Lighthouse Performance

The Google Lighthouse performance score is a metric that measures the speed and performance of a website. It’s an overall score that ranges from 0 to 100 and is generated based on a number of different performance metrics, such as the time it takes for a website to load, the time it takes for a website to become interactive, the size of the resources used by the website, and other factors that impact the user experience.

A high performance score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is fast and responsive, which can lead to a better user experience and improved search engine rankings. On the other hand, a low performance score can indicate that a website is slow and unresponsive, and can negatively impact the user experience.

Mobile Performance
29%
Desktop Performance
50%

Core Web Vitals

Core Web Vitals are a set of specific factors that Google considers important in a webpage’s overall user experience. Core Web Vitals are made up of three specific page speed and user interaction measurements: Largest Contentful PaintFirst Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift.

VitalMobileDesktopTarget
Largest Contentful Paint13.8 s3.9 s< 2.5 s
First Input Delay560 ms310 ms< 100ms
Cumulative Layout Shift0.0170.006 0.1

Tracking scripts

All the tracking scripts on the site generated ~319 KB of data

A tracking script is a code snippet designed to track the flow of visitors who visit a website. Media, advertising, and analytics organisations will provide a script to add to your website that sends data directly to their servers. This data can then be used to measure goals and conversions, analyse user behaviour, and influence advertising campaigns.

Consider how much of this data you actually need and use? How often do you review the analytics data, and does this inform genuine change? Are you actively running social media campaigns? Consider pausing or removing tracking scripts that aren’t being actively used.

static.cloudflareinsights.com 1 6 KB
googletagmanager.com 2 142 KB
google-analytics.com 3 21 KB
snap.licdn.com 1 5 KB
connect.facebook.net 2 138 KB
stats.g.doubleclick.net 1 579 B
google.com 1 557 B
cdn.linkedin.oribi.io 1 459 B
px.ads.linkedin.com 3 3 KB
vc.hotjar.io 1 339 B
linkedin.com 1 2 KB
facebook.com 2 328 B

Opportunities

Remove autoplaying or preloaded media files

By removing 1 autoplaying or preloaded videos, roughly 10.9 KB could be removed from the page load.

This would reduce the page transfer size by 0% and reduce the pages emissions from 0.85 grams of CO2 to 0.84 grams of CO2.

Autoplaying videos can have a negative impact on the user experience for several reasons:

  1. Increased data usage: Autoplaying videos can consume a lot of data, especially if they are set to play in high definition. This can be a problem for users with limited data plans or slow connections, who may experience slow or interrupted playback.
  2. Annoyance factor: Autoplaying videos can be annoying for users, especially if they are accompanied by sound. This can lead to a negative perception of the website and decreased engagement.
  3. Reduced accessibility: Autoplaying videos can be a problem for users with accessibility needs, such as users who are blind or have hearing difficulties.
  4. Increased page load time: Autoplaying videos can increase the overall page load time, leading to a slower user experience.
  5. Decreased battery life: Autoplaying videos can consume a lot of battery power, especially on mobile devices, leading to reduced battery life.

In order to minimise the impact of autoplaying videos on the user experience, it is recommended to use them sparingly and only when necessary. It is also important to provide users with the option to turn off autoplaying videos and to allow them to control the playback of videos on the page. Additionally, videos should be optimised for performance and should be accompanied by captions or transcripts to improve accessibility.

olark-chimes.ogg 11 KB 0%

Optimise images

By optimising the following images, roughly 868 KB could be removed from the transfer size, about 23%. This would reduce the CO2 generated per page load from 0.85g grams to 0.65 grams.

Images should be optimised for the web for several reasons:

  1. Reduced file size: Optimizing images can result in a smaller file size, which can help to reduce the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. This can lead to faster page load times and improved performance.
  2. Improved user experience: Optimising images can help to improve the overall user experience, as pages with optimised images load faster and are more responsive.
  3. Lower emissions: Optimising images can help to reduce the emissions associated with data transfer, as less data needs to be transmitted over the network.
  4. Better accessibility: Optimising images can make them more accessible to users with slower connections or limited data plans.
mac_entry_2.jpg 451 KB 12% 268 KB
nms.png 244 KB 6% 221 KB
EDM-Header_1.png 71 KB 2% 64 KB
bolwarra_working_bee.jpg 58 KB 2% 25 KB
medium_resolution-the_levee_central_maitland.jpeg 56 KB 1% 24 KB
medium_resolution-hunter_river_view_03_1cropped.jpeg 50 KB 1% 23 KB
bc841b227eb6367ca09a6cc80df85d70_2.jpeg 40 KB 1% 18 KB
2023_state_election_advocacy_report_1_0.jpg 39 KB 1% 19 KB
wasteheader.jpg 39 KB 1% 20 KB
058a2906.jpg 38 KB 1% 17 KB
medium_1200px_wide-robins_oval_grandstand.jpeg 38 KB 1% 18 KB
riverwalking.jpg 33 KB 1% 15 KB
pool_square.jpg 33 KB 1% 16 KB
94131b0006842d09f3a04367aaa406c7_bw6au9h.jpeg 31 KB 1% 15 KB
microsoftteams-image_3.png 29 KB 1% 15 KB
skate-park.jpg 29 KB 1% 15 KB
lorn-bikes.jpg 28 KB 1% 11 KB
99ca9091f0e68e4285b5351bca1a9821.jpeg 27 KB 1% 14 KB
mrag.jpg 26 KB 1% 10 KB
surveyor.jpg 23 KB 1% 10 KB
park_1.jpg 22 KB 1% 10 KB
service-centre.jpg 22 KB 1% 10 KB
medium_1200px_wide-mayor_philip_penfold_corporate_headshot_2022.jpeg 18 KB 0% 10 KB

Replace icon font files

Font icons can have a negative impact on performance and emissions because they can increase the size of the page and the amount of data that needs to be downloaded. Some specific reasons why font icons can be bad for performance and emissions include:

  1. Increased file size: Font icons are typically included as part of a web font, which can be a large file that needs to be downloaded. This can increase the overall size of the page, leading to slower load times and higher emissions.
  2. Inefficient rendering: Web fonts are sometimes loaded and rendered inefficiently, which can result in slow performance and higher emissions.
  3. Unused icons: Font icons often include a large number of icons that may not be used on a particular page, increasing the file size and leading to inefficient use of resources.

While icon fonts are still widely used on the web, and they can be a useful tool for adding icons to a website. it is a dated practice when there are better options such as SVG icons, which can be more efficient and have a lower impact on performance and emissions.

FontSize
fontawesome-webfont.woff276 KB

Subset large font files

Fonts should be subsetted to reduce the file size, improve performance, and reduce emissions. Subsetting a font involves removing any characters that are not needed for a particular use case, resulting in a smaller file size and faster page load times. Some specific reasons why fonts should be subsetted include:

  1. Reduced file size: Subsetting a font removes any unused characters, which can result in a smaller file size. This can help to reduce the amount of data that needs to be downloaded, leading to faster page load times and lower emissions.
  2. Improved performance: Fonts that are subsetted are faster to load and render than fonts that are not subsetted. This can help to improve the overall performance of a website, leading to a better user experience.

Overall, subsetting fonts is a good practice for anyone looking to optimize the performance and reduce the emissions of a website of a website.

ionicons.ttf ~185 KB ~167 KB
Pe-icon-7-stroke.woff ~58 KB ~41 KB
memvYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVTS-mu0SC55I.woff2 ~39 KB ~22 KB
opensans-bold.woff2 ~38 KB ~20 KB
opensans-regular.woff2 ~36 KB ~18 KB

Convert font files to woff2

WOFF2 is considered to be the best font format for web use because it provides a good balance of file size and compatibility. Some specific reasons why WOFF2 is a good font format include:

  1. Small file size: WOFF2 is a compressed font format, which means that it has a smaller file size compared to other font formats like TTF or OTF. This is important for web use because smaller file sizes can help to reduce the amount of data that needs to be downloaded, leading to faster page load times.
  2. High-quality font rendering: WOFF2 provides high-quality font rendering, making it a good choice for use on the web.

It’s worth noting that WOFF2 is not the only font format that can be used on the web, and there may be cases where other formats like WOFF or TTF are more suitable, depending on the specific requirements of the website. However, for most cases, WOFF2 is considered to be the best font format for web use due to its combination of small file size, good browser support, and high-quality font rendering.

Fontformat
Pe-icon-7-stroke.woffwoff
ionicons.ttfttf

Remove third party font files

Font files should be loaded from the same hosting as the website because

  1. Increased loading time: Third-party sub-resources, such as scripts, fonts, or images, need to be downloaded from a separate server before they can be displayed on the website. This can increase the overall loading time of the page, leading to a slower user experience.
  2. Dependence on external servers: The loading of third-party subresources is dependent on the availability and performance of the external servers that host them. If these servers are slow or unavailable, it can result in slow page loading times or even errors.
  3. Increased risk of security threats: Third-party subresources can introduce security risks to a website, as they can contain malicious code or be used to track user activity.
HostFont
fonts.gstatic.commemvYaGs126MiZpBA-UvWbX2vVnXBbObj2OVTS-mu0SC55I.woff2
static.olark.comnoto-sans-v11-latin-700.woff2
static.olark.comnoto-sans-v11-latin-regular.woff2
static.userback.iopxiByp8kv8JHgFVrLGT9Z1xlFd2JQEk.woff2

Replace jQuery and jQuery libraries with more modern code

jQuery is a popular and widely-used JavaScript library that simplifies web development by providing a set of tools and functions to interact with HTML documents, handle events, create animations, and make asynchronous HTTP requests.

In the past, jQuery was a very popular choice for web development because it simplified many common tasks and provided a consistent and cross-browser-compatible API. However, with the advancement of modern web technologies and improvements in browser capabilities, the need for jQuery has decreased.

Many modern web frameworks and libraries, such as React and Angular, provide their own set of tools for handling common tasks and interacting with the DOM, making jQuery less necessary in many cases. The Javascript engine in modern browsers have also become more consistent in the feature implementations often eliminating the need for a library like jQuery.

jQuery represents an opportunity because:

  1. Performance: While jQuery is a powerful and useful library, it can slow down website performance due to its large size and complex code. Modern browsers have also improved their native support for many of the features that jQuery provides, reducing the need for it.
  2. Maintainability: jQuery code can be difficult to maintain and update, particularly as web technologies evolve and change. This can make it harder for developers to keep up with best practices and standards for web development.
  3. Accessibility: Some jQuery plugins and features can create accessibility issues, particularly for users who rely on assistive technologies. This can make it harder for people with disabilities to use and access websites.

First Contentful Paint

First Contentful Paint (FCP) is a performance metric that measures the time it takes for the first piece of content to be rendered on the screen when a user navigates to a web page. This content can be any visual element on the page, such as text, images, or a background color.

FCP is important because it directly affects the perceived speed of a website, and can impact user engagement and conversion rates. A faster FCP can lead to a better user experience and improved performance.

Here are a few ways you can optimise your FCP:

  1. Optimise images: Large, unoptimised images can slow down a page’s FCP. You can optimise images by compressing them, reducing their dimensions, and choosing the right format for each image.
  2. Minimise HTTP requests: Each resource requested by a web page, such as images, scripts, and stylesheets, requires a separate HTTP request. Minimising the number of HTTP requests can help to reduce the time it takes for a page to render.
  3. Prioritize critical content: Prioritizing critical content, such as above-the-fold content, can help to ensure that users see something on the screen quickly, even if the rest of the page is still loading.
  4. Reduce server response time: A slow server response time can significantly impact FCP. Optimizing server-side code and server settings can help to reduce response times and improve FCP.
  5. Use a performance monitoring tool: There are many tools available that can help you monitor your website’s performance, including FCP. These tools can help you identify performance issues and track your progress as you implement optimizations.
MobileDesktop
Score15%85%
Timing4.5 s1.0 s

Largest Contentful Paint

MobileDesktop
Score0%18%
Timing13.8 s3.9 s

Total Blocking Time

MobileDesktop
Score3%32%
Timing2,950 ms470 ms

Speed Index

MobileDesktop
Score13%20%
Timing9.2 s3.3 s

Time to Interactive

MobileDesktop
Score6%76%
Timing16.0 s3.2 s

Max Potential First Input Delay

MobileDesktop
Score5%33%
Timing560 ms310 ms

First Meaningful Paint

MobileDesktop
Score37%85%
Timing4.6 s1.0 s

Eliminate render-blocking resources

MobileDesktop
Score25%59%
InsightPotential savings of 2,870 msPotential savings of 590 ms

Properly size images

MobileDesktop
Score100%97%
InsightPotential savings of 64 KiB

Minify JavaScript

MobileDesktop
Score88%100%
InsightPotential savings of 24 KiBPotential savings of 37 KiB

Reduce unused CSS

MobileDesktop
Score50%97%
InsightPotential savings of 144 KiBPotential savings of 149 KiB

Reduce unused JavaScript

MobileDesktop
Score0%53%
InsightPotential savings of 696 KiBPotential savings of 699 KiB

Efficiently encode images

MobileDesktop
Score67%97%
InsightPotential savings of 69 KiBPotential savings of 69 KiB

Serve images in next-gen formats

MobileDesktop
Score11%54%
InsightPotential savings of 805 KiBPotential savings of 868 KiB

Enable text compression

MobileDesktop
Score75%97%
InsightPotential savings of 9 KiBPotential savings of 9 KiB

Reduce initial server response time

MobileDesktop
GradeFailFail
InsightRoot document took 1,830 msRoot document took 2,010 ms

Avoid enormous network payloads

MobileDesktop
Score57%56%
InsightTotal size was 3,765 KiBTotal size was 3,790 KiB

Serve static assets with an efficient cache policy

MobileDesktop
Score4%4%
Insight110 resources found110 resources found

Avoid an excessive DOM size

MobileDesktop
Score12%12%
Insight2,246 elements2,279 elements

JavaScript execution time

MobileDesktop
Score29%90%
Timing5.4 s1.3 s

Minimize main-thread work

MobileDesktop
Score2%65%
Timing11.1 s3.2 s

Ensure text remains visible during webfont load

MobileDesktop
GradeFailFail

Reduce the impact of third-party code

MobileDesktop
GradeFailFail
InsightThird-party code blocked the main thread for 2,530 msThird-party code blocked the main thread for 400 ms

Does not use passive listeners to improve scrolling performance

MobileDesktop
GradeFailFail

Image elements do not have explicit width and height

MobileDesktop
GradePassFail