House Land /
Insights
Summary
- Pages monitored
- 11
- Average mobile transfer size
- 10 MB
- Average desktop transfer size
- 10 MB
Resource Summary
| Type | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| document | 22 | 638.82 KB | 1% |
| stylesheet | 10 | 148.49 KB | 0% |
| script | 74 | 5.88 MB | 10% |
| image | 348 | 46.16 MB | 82% |
| font | 11 | 630.34 KB | 1% |
| fetch | 33 | 157.50 KB | 0% |
| xhr | 33 | 2.47 MB | 4% |
| ping | 11 | 0.00 B | 0% |
| other | 15 | 376.24 KB | 1% |
| preflight | 1 | 671.00 B | 0% |
Google Lighthouse average scores
| Category | Mobile | Desktop |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 41% | 51% |
| Accessibility | 85% | 86% |
| SEO | 94% | 94% |
| Best Practices | 99% | 100% |
| PWA | ? | ? |
Emissions
| Form Factor | Average CO2 | Average rating |
|---|---|---|
| Mobile | 0.89g | F |
| Desktop | 0.94g | F |
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
- 28%
- Desktop Performance
- 42%
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 Paint, First Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift.
Pass or fail?
| Mobile | Fail |
|---|---|
| Desktop | Fail |
CWV Breakdown
| Vital | Mobile | Desktop | Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| Largest Contentful Paint | 6.4 s | 1.3 s | < 2.5 s |
| First Input Delay | 230 ms | 340 ms | < 100ms |
| Cumulative Layout Shift | 0.483 | 0.327 | 0.1 |
Tracking scripts
All the tracking scripts on the site generated ~744 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.
View details
| googletagmanager.com | 2 | 305 KB |
| google-analytics.com | 2 | 22 KB |
| bat.bing.com | 3 | 19 KB |
| connect.facebook.net | 2 | 221 KB |
| google.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| stats.g.doubleclick.net | 2 | 973 B |
| analytics.google.com | 1 | 801 B |
| googleads.g.doubleclick.net | 1 | 3 KB |
| interactive-riverfield-v3.appspot.com | 1 | 137 KB |
| insite-land-tracking-dot-insite-land.appspot.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| google.com.au | 1 | 620 B |
| clarity.ms | 1 | 1 KB |
| facebook.com | 1 | 449 B |
| scripts.clarity.ms | 1 | 26 KB |
| c.clarity.ms | 2 | 2 KB |
| q.clarity.ms | 3 | 843 B |
| c.bing.com | 1 | 1 KB |
Opportunities
Optimise images2 MB0.222g
By optimising the following images, roughly 2 MB could be removed from the transfer size, about 7%. This would reduce the CO2 generated per page load from 3.01g grams to 2.78 grams.
Images should be optimised for the web for several reasons:
- 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.
- Improved user experience: Optimising images can help to improve the overall user experience, as pages with optimised images load faster and are more responsive.
- Lower emissions: Optimising images can help to reduce the emissions associated with data transfer, as less data needs to be transmitted over the network.
- Better accessibility: Optimising images can make them more accessible to users with slower connections or limited data plans.
View details
Subset large font files432 KB0.038g
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:
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| averta-extrabold.otf | ~200 KB | ~182 KB |
| Averta-Std-Bold.otf | ~79 KB | ~62 KB |
| FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff | ~68 KB | ~50 KB |
| 51f01bf8-c568-40b2-af85-6bff46971ecb.woff2 | ~63 KB | ~46 KB |
| 477f324e-236a-4290-81be-3dc6cd89aee5.woff2 | ~62 KB | ~45 KB |
| KFO7CnqEu92Fr1ME7kSn66aGLdTylUAMa3yUBHMdazQ.woff2 | ~35 KB | ~17 KB |
| c8678051706b9e75908e5f4676970a35.woff2 | ~34 KB | ~17 KB |
| source-sans-pro-v14-latin-ext_latin-regular.c223f6a7fb3cfc96b4e1.woff2 | ~26 KB | ~8 KB |
| DIN-Regular.woff | ~22 KB | ~5 KB |
Convert font files to woff2277 KB
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:
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| averta-extrabold.otf | otf |
| FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff | woff |
| Averta-Std-Bold.otf | otf |
Remove third party font files
Font files should be loaded from the same hosting as the website because
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| storage.googleapis.com | DIN-Regular.woff |
| fonts.gstatic.com | KFO7CnqEu92Fr1ME7kSn66aGLdTylUAMa3yUBHMdazQ.woff2 |
| cdn.chatbot.com | source-sans-pro-v14-latin-ext_latin-regular.c223f6a7fb3cfc96b4e1.woff2 |
| storage.googleapis.com | averta-extrabold.otf |
| storage.googleapis.com | FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff |
| storage.googleapis.com | Averta-Std-Bold.otf |
Replace jQuery and jQuery libraries with more modern code40 KB0g
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| jquery.min.js | 33 KB |
| jquery-migrate.min.js | 6 KB |
| jquery.json.min.js | 2 KB |
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87% | 100% |
| Timing | 1.9 s | 0.5 s |
Largest Contentful Paint
Largest Contentful Paint marks the time at which the largest text or image is painted. Learn more about the Largest Contentful Paint metric
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 10% | 87% |
| Timing | 6.4 s | 1.3 s |
Total Blocking Time
Sum of all time periods between FCP and Time to Interactive, when task length exceeded 50ms, expressed in milliseconds. Learn more about the Total Blocking Time metric.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 40% | 1% |
| Timing | 730 ms | 1,520 ms |
Cumulative Layout Shift
Cumulative Layout Shift measures the movement of visible elements within the viewport. Learn more about the Cumulative Layout Shift metric.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 17% | 35% |
| Timing | 0.483 | 0.327 |
Speed Index
Speed Index shows how quickly the contents of a page are visibly populated. Learn more about the Speed Index metric.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 7% | 16% |
| Timing | 10.5 s | 3.5 s |
Layout shift culprits
Layout shifts occur when elements move absent any user interaction. Investigate the causes of layout shifts, such as elements being added, removed, or their fonts changing as the page loads.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 0% | 0% |
Forced reflow
A forced reflow occurs when JavaScript queries geometric properties (such as offsetWidth) after styles have been invalidated by a change to the DOM state. This can result in poor performance. Learn more about forced reflows and possible mitigations.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 0% | 0% |
LCP request discovery
Optimize LCP by making the LCP image discoverable from the HTML immediately, and avoiding lazy-loading
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 0% | 0% |
Network dependency tree
Avoid chaining critical requests by reducing the length of chains, reducing the download size of resources, or deferring the download of unnecessary resources to improve page load.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 0% | 0% |
Time to Interactive
Time to Interactive is the amount of time it takes for the page to become fully interactive. Learn more about the Time to Interactive metric.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 0% | 30% |
| Timing | 24.1 s | 5.7 s |
Max Potential First Input Delay
The maximum potential First Input Delay that your users could experience is the duration of the longest task. Learn more about the Maximum Potential First Input Delay metric.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 57% | 27% |
| Timing | 230 ms | 340 ms |
Insights
Carbon footprint
The carbon footprint of a website can be calculated by estimating the amount of energy consumed by the data center hosting the website, as well as the energy consumed by users accessing the site. Factors that can influence a website’s carbon footprint include the size of the site, the amount of traffic it receives, and the technology and hosting infrastructure used to host the site.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | F | F |
| Green Hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Dirtier than | 98% | 98% |
| CO2 per page load | 2.99g | 3.01g |
| CO2 wasted per page load | ~1.9g | ~0.3g |
| Transfer size | 33.50MB | 33.70MB |
| Transfer size percentile | 99% | 99% |
| Size wasted | 20.78 MB | 2.91 MB |
Sustainable hosting
By hosting this site on a server powered by renewable energy, this page generated ~3.01grams of CO2 instead of ~3.68grams of CO2.
Sustainable web hosting refers to hosting services that are designed to minimise their impact on the environment and to promote sustainability. This can include using renewable energy sources, reducing waste and emissions, and implementing best practices for energy efficiency.
Sustainable web hosting providers aim to reduce their carbon footprint by using energy-efficient server hardware, data centres, and networking equipment, as well as implementing environmentally friendly policies and practices. For example, some providers may use renewable energy sources, such as wind or solar power, to power their data centres, or they may use high-efficiency cooling systems to reduce energy consumption.
Tracking scripts
All the tracking scripts on the site generated ~744 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.
View details
| googletagmanager.com | 2 | 305 KB |
| google-analytics.com | 2 | 22 KB |
| bat.bing.com | 3 | 19 KB |
| connect.facebook.net | 2 | 221 KB |
| google.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| stats.g.doubleclick.net | 2 | 973 B |
| analytics.google.com | 1 | 801 B |
| googleads.g.doubleclick.net | 1 | 3 KB |
| interactive-riverfield-v3.appspot.com | 1 | 137 KB |
| insite-land-tracking-dot-insite-land.appspot.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| google.com.au | 1 | 620 B |
| clarity.ms | 1 | 1 KB |
| facebook.com | 1 | 449 B |
| scripts.clarity.ms | 1 | 26 KB |
| c.clarity.ms | 2 | 2 KB |
| q.clarity.ms | 3 | 843 B |
| c.bing.com | 1 | 1 KB |
Opportunities
Optimise images2 MB0.222g
By optimising the following images, roughly 2 MB could be removed from the transfer size, about 7%. This would reduce the CO2 generated per page load from 3.01g grams to 2.78 grams.
Images should be optimised for the web for several reasons:
- 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.
- Improved user experience: Optimising images can help to improve the overall user experience, as pages with optimised images load faster and are more responsive.
- Lower emissions: Optimising images can help to reduce the emissions associated with data transfer, as less data needs to be transmitted over the network.
- Better accessibility: Optimising images can make them more accessible to users with slower connections or limited data plans.
View details
Subset large font files432 KB0.038g
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:
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| averta-extrabold.otf | ~200 KB | ~182 KB |
| Averta-Std-Bold.otf | ~79 KB | ~62 KB |
| FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff | ~68 KB | ~50 KB |
| 51f01bf8-c568-40b2-af85-6bff46971ecb.woff2 | ~63 KB | ~46 KB |
| 477f324e-236a-4290-81be-3dc6cd89aee5.woff2 | ~62 KB | ~45 KB |
| KFO7CnqEu92Fr1ME7kSn66aGLdTylUAMa3yUBHMdazQ.woff2 | ~35 KB | ~17 KB |
| c8678051706b9e75908e5f4676970a35.woff2 | ~34 KB | ~17 KB |
| source-sans-pro-v14-latin-ext_latin-regular.c223f6a7fb3cfc96b4e1.woff2 | ~26 KB | ~8 KB |
| DIN-Regular.woff | ~22 KB | ~5 KB |
Convert font files to woff2277 KB
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:
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| averta-extrabold.otf | otf |
| FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff | woff |
| Averta-Std-Bold.otf | otf |
Remove third party font files
Font files should be loaded from the same hosting as the website because
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| storage.googleapis.com | DIN-Regular.woff |
| fonts.gstatic.com | KFO7CnqEu92Fr1ME7kSn66aGLdTylUAMa3yUBHMdazQ.woff2 |
| cdn.chatbot.com | source-sans-pro-v14-latin-ext_latin-regular.c223f6a7fb3cfc96b4e1.woff2 |
| storage.googleapis.com | averta-extrabold.otf |
| storage.googleapis.com | FontsFree-Net-AvertaStandard-Regular.woff |
| storage.googleapis.com | Averta-Std-Bold.otf |
Replace jQuery and jQuery libraries with more modern code40 KB0g
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
View details
| jquery.min.js | 33 KB |
| jquery-migrate.min.js | 6 KB |
| jquery.json.min.js | 2 KB |
Insights
Google Lighthouse Accessibility
The accessibility score in Google Lighthouse is a metric that measures how well a website is designed for users with disabilities. The score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better accessibility.
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s accessibility based on a number of different factors, such as the presence of alternative text for images, the use of semantic HTML, the ability to navigate the page using only a keyboard, and the use of appropriate color contrasts.
A high accessibility score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-designed for users with disabilities and provides an inclusive user experience. On the other hand, a low accessibility score can indicate that a website has barriers that make it difficult or impossible for some users to access and use the content.
In automated testing, this page scored 80% for accessibility on desktop. Keep in mind that automated accessibility testing is not perfect and that manual tests, use case testing, or usability testing should be completed as well.
- Mobile Accessibility
- 88%
- Desktop Accessibility
- 83%
Opportunities
Background and foreground colors do not have a sufficient contrast ratio.
Low-contrast text is difficult or impossible for many users to read. Learn how to provide sufficient color contrast.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | Fail | Fail |
Links do not have a discernible name
Link text (and alternate text for images, when used as links) that is discernible, unique, and focusable improves the navigation experience for screen reader users. Learn how to make links accessible.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | Fail | Fail |
Select elements do not have associated label elements.
Form elements without effective labels can create frustrating experiences for screen reader users. Learn more about the select element.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | Pass | Fail |
Document does not have a main landmark.
One main landmark helps screen reader users navigate a web page. Learn more about landmarks.
| Mobile | Desktop | |
|---|---|---|
| Grade | Fail | Fail |
Insights
Google Lighthouse Best Practices
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s best practices based on a number of different factors, such as the use of HTTPS encryption, the use of efficient caching policies, the implementation of modern web technologies, and the avoidance of deprecated technologies.
A high best practices score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-designed and follows best practices for web development, which can lead to better performance, security, and accessibility. On the other hand, a low best practices score can indicate that a website has room for improvement in terms of following best practices.
- Mobile Best Practices
- 100%
- Desktop Best Practices
- 100%
Google Lighthouse SEO
Google Lighthouse evaluates a website’s SEO based on a number of different factors, such as the presence of title and description tags, the use of header tags, the presence of structured data, the use of image alt tags, and the use of crawlable links.
A high SEO score in Google Lighthouse indicates that a website is well-optimized for search engines, which can help to improve its visibility in search results and increase its organic traffic. On the other hand, a low SEO score can indicate that a website has room for improvement in terms of its optimization for search engines.
While a high SEO score can help to improve a website’s visibility in search results, it’s not a guarantee of higher rankings, as search engine algorithms take many other factors into account when determining the ranking of a website.
- Mobile SEO
- 100%
- Desktop SEO
- 100%
Tracking scripts
All the tracking scripts on the site generated ~744 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.
View details
| googletagmanager.com | 2 | 305 KB |
| google-analytics.com | 2 | 22 KB |
| bat.bing.com | 3 | 19 KB |
| connect.facebook.net | 2 | 221 KB |
| google.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| stats.g.doubleclick.net | 2 | 973 B |
| analytics.google.com | 1 | 801 B |
| googleads.g.doubleclick.net | 1 | 3 KB |
| interactive-riverfield-v3.appspot.com | 1 | 137 KB |
| insite-land-tracking-dot-insite-land.appspot.com | 3 | 2 KB |
| google.com.au | 1 | 620 B |
| clarity.ms | 1 | 1 KB |
| facebook.com | 1 | 449 B |
| scripts.clarity.ms | 1 | 26 KB |
| c.clarity.ms | 2 | 2 KB |
| q.clarity.ms | 3 | 843 B |
| c.bing.com | 1 | 1 KB |
Cost to load
| Price per GB (USD) | $3.12 |
|---|---|
| Price per GB (Local) | 3.12 USD |
| Price to load PPV (USD) | $0.102 |
| Price to load PPV (Local) | 0.102 USD |
2022 Mobile data pricing sourced from cable.co.uk
Opportunities
Security headers to set1/6
HTTP security headers are special HTTP headers that can be added to a website’s response to help improve its security. They are important because they can help to protect a website and its users from various security threats, such as cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks, cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks, and other types of malicious activity.
It’s important to note, however, that implementing HTTP security headers is just one aspect of a comprehensive security strategy, and that other measures, such as regular software updates, secure coding practices, and regular security audits, are also important for maintaining a secure website.
View details
It's important to note, however, that implementing HTTP security headers is just one aspect of a comprehensive security strategy, and that other measures, such as regular software updates, secure coding practices, and regular security audits, are also important for maintaining a secure website.
Switch to a privacy focussed analytics platform
Google Analytics collects data on website users and their behaviour, which can raise privacy concerns for some visitors. Website owners who use Google Analytics have access to a range of data points, including IP addresses, browser types, device information, and user behaviour on the site.
While Google Analytics does provide some tools to help website owners protect the privacy of their visitors, such as data retention controls and the ability to enable IP address anonymisation, it’s important for website owners to be transparent about the data they collect and how they use it. Website owners should also take steps to ensure that any third-party tools they use, including Google Analytics, comply with relevant privacy laws and regulations.
Additionally, some users may choose to block Google Analytics tracking using ad-blocking software or browser extensions that prevent tracking cookies from being set. This can impact the accuracy of website analytics, but website owners should respect the privacy preferences of their visitors and provide alternative means for users to access the site and its content.
The following alternatives to Google Analytics are privacy focussed, meaning they don’t compromise the visitors privacy for the sake of data collection and reporting.
| Home | Accessibility 82% | Lighthouse Performance Score 42% | Transfer size 9MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.82g | Rating E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 360 View / | Accessibility 76% | Lighthouse Performance Score 61% | Transfer size 5MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.48g | Rating C |
| 5 Percent Deposit / | Accessibility 86% | Lighthouse Performance Score 64% | Transfer size 3MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.3g | Rating B |
| Contact / | Accessibility 88% | Lighthouse Performance Score 63% | Transfer size 3MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.3g | Rating B |
| Developer / | Accessibility 86% | Lighthouse Performance Score 52% | Transfer size 5MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.47g | Rating C |
| House Land / | Accessibility 83% | Lighthouse Performance Score 42% | Transfer size 34MB | CO2 emitted per page view 3.01g | Rating F |
| Land For Sale / | Accessibility 91% | Lighthouse Performance Score 37% | Transfer size 5MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.41g | Rating C |
| Masterplan / | Accessibility 87% | Lighthouse Performance Score 30% | Transfer size 11MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.94g | Rating F |
| News / | Accessibility 89% | Lighthouse Performance Score 64% | Transfer size 5MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.44g | Rating C |
| News / Fields Of Green And Open Space Aplenty / | Accessibility 87% | Lighthouse Performance Score 50% | Transfer size 3MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.27g | Rating B |
| Riverfield Rise / | Accessibility 88% | Lighthouse Performance Score 58% | Transfer size 8MB | CO2 emitted per page view 0.68g | Rating E |