In the fourteen years that I've been working in the web performance industry, I've done a LOT of research, writing, and speaking about the psychology of page speed – in other words, why we crave fast, seamless online experiences. In fact, the entire first chapter of my book, Time Is Money (reprinted here courtesy of the good folks at O'Reilly), is dedicated to the subject.
I recently shared some of my favourite research at Beyond Tellerrand (video here) and thought it would be fun to round it up in a post. Here we're going to cover:
There's a lot of fascinating material to cover, so let's get started!
Earlier this year, when Google announced that Interaction to Next Paint (INP) will replace First Input Delay (FID) as the responsiveness metric in Core Web Vitals in *gulp* March of 2024, we had a lot to say about it. (TLDR: FID doesn't correlate with real user behavior, so we don't endorse it as a meaningful metric.)
Our stance hasn't changed much since then. For the most part, everyone agrees the transition from FID to INP is a good thing. INP certainly seems to be capturing interaction issues that we see in the field.
However, after several months of discussing the impending change and getting a better look at INP issues in the wild, it's hard to ignore the fact that mobile stands out as the biggest INP offender by a wide margin. This doesn't get talked about as much as it should, so in this post we'll explore:
Earlier this year, Google announced that Interaction to Next Paint (INP) is no longer an experimental metric. INP will replace First Input Delay (FID) as a Core Web Vital in March of 2024.
Now that INP has arrived to dethrone FID as the responsiveness metric in Core Web Vitals, we've turned our eye to scrutinizing its effectiveness. In this post, we'll look at real-world data and attempt to answer: What correlation – if any – does INP have with actual user behavior and business metrics?
Demonstrating the impact of performance on your users – and on your business – is one of the best ways to get your company to care about the speed of your site.
Tracking goal-based metrics like conversion rate alongside performance data can give you richer and more compelling insights into how the performance of your site affects your users. This concept is not new by any means. In 2010, the Performance and Reliability team I was fortunate enough to lead at Walmartlabs shared our findings around the impact of front-end times on conversion rates. (This study and a number of other case studies tracked over the years can be found at WPOstats.)
Setting up conversion tracking in SpeedCurve RUM is fairly simple and definitely worthwhile. This post covers:
For more than ten years, I've been writing about page bloat, its impact on site speed, and ultimately how it affects your users and your business. You might think that this topic would be played out by now, but every year I learn new things – beyond the overarching fact that pages keep getting bigger and more complex, as you can see in this chart, using data from the HTTP Archive.
In this post, we'll cover:
"I made my pages faster, but my business and user engagement metrics didn't change. WHY???"
"How do I know how fast my pages should be?"
"How can I demonstrate the business value of performance to people in my organization?"
If you've ever asked yourself any of these questions, then you could find the answers in identifying and understanding the performance plateau for your site.
The performance plateau is the point at which changes to your website’s rendering metrics (such as Start Render and Largest Contentful Paint) cease to matter because you’ve bottomed out in terms of business and user engagement metrics.
In other words, if your performance metrics are on the performance plateau, making them a couple of seconds faster probably won't help your business.
The concept of the performance plateau isn't new. I first encountered it more than ten years ago, when I was looking at data for a number of sites and noticed that – not only was there a correlation between performance metrics and business/engagement metrics – there was also a noticeable plateau in almost every correlation chart I looked at.
A few months ago someone asked me if I've done any recent investigation into the performance plateau, to see if the concept still holds true. When I realized how much time has passed since my initial research, I thought it would be fun to take a fresh look.
In this post, I'll show how to use your own data to find the plateau for your site, and then what to do with your new insights.
Exploring real user (RUM) data can be a hugely enlightening process. It uncovers things about your users and their behavior that you never might have suspected. That said, it's not uncommon to spend precious time peeling back the layers of the onion, only to find false positives or uncertainty in all that data.
At SpeedCurve, we believe a big part of our job is making your job easier. This was a major driver behind the Synthetic Compare dashboard we released last year, which so many of you given us great feedback on.
As you may have guessed, since then we've been hard at work coming up with the right way to explore and compare your RUM datasets using a similar design pattern. Today, we are thrilled to announce your new RUM Compare dashboard!
With your RUM Compare dashboard, you can easily generate side-by-side comparisons for any two cohorts of data. Some of the many reasons you might want to do this include:
Let's take a tour...
One of the great things about Google's Core Web Vitals is that they provide a standard way to measure our visitors’ experience. Core Web Vitals can answer questions like:
Sensible defaults, such as Core Web Vitals, are a good start, but one pitfall of standard measures is that they can miss what’s actually most important.
Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) makes the assumption that the largest visible element is the most important content from the visitors’ perspective; however, we don’t have a choice about which element it measures. LCP may not be measuring the most appropriate – or even the same – element for each page view.
In the case of a first-time visitor, the largest element might be a consent banner. On subsequent visits to the same page, the largest element might be an image for a product or a photo that illustrates a news story.
The screenshots from What Hifi (a UK audio-visual magazine) illustrate this problem. When the consent banner is shown, then one of its paragraphs is the LCP element. When the consent banner is not shown, an article title becomes the LCP element. In other words, the LCP timestamp varies depending on which of these two experiences the visitor had!
What Hi Fi with and without the consent banner visible
(See our more recent page growth post: What is page bloat? And how is it hurting your business, search rank, and users?)
I've been writing about page size and complexity for years. If you've been working in the performance space for a while and you hear me start to talk about page growth, I'd forgive you if you started running away. ;)
But pages keep getting bigger and more complex year over year – and this increasing size and complexity is not fully mitigated by faster devices and networks, or by our hard-working browsers. Clearly we need to keep talking about it. We need to understand how ever-growing pages work against us. And we need to have strategies in place to understand and manage our pages.
In this post, we'll cover:
Chances are, you're here because of Google's update to its search algorithm, which affects both desktop and mobile, and which includes Core Web Vitals as a ranking factor. You may also be here because you've heard about the most recent potential candidates for addition to Core Web Vitals, which were just announced at Chrome Dev Summit.
A few things are clear:
If you're new to Core Web Vitals, this is a Google initiative that was launched in early 2020. Web Vitals is (currently) a set of three metrics – Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift – that are intended to measure the loading, interactivity, and visual stability of a page.
When Google talks, people listen. I talk with a lot of companies and I can attest that, since Web Vitals were announced, they've shot to the top of many people's list of things to care about. But Google's prioritization of page speed in search ranking isn't new, even for mobile. As far back as 2013, Google announced that pages that load slowly on mobile devices would be penalized in mobile search.
Keep reading to find out:
If you want to understand how people actually experience your site, you need to monitor real users. The data we get from real user monitoring (RUM) is extremely useful when trying to get a grasp on performance. Not only does it serve as the source of truth for your most important budgets and KPIs, it help us understand that performance is a broad distribution that encompasses many different cohorts of users.
While real user monitoring gives us the opportunity for unparalleled insight into user experience, the biggest challenge with RUM data is that there's so much of it. Navigating through all this data has typically been done by peeling back one layer of information at a time, and it often proves difficult to identify the root cause when we see a change:
"What happened here?"
"Did the last release cause a drop in performance?"
"How can I drill down from here to see what's going on?"
"Is the issue confined to a specific region? Browser? Page?"
Today we're excited to release a new capability – your RUM Sessions dashboard – which allows you to drill into a dataset and explore those sessions that occurred within a given span of time.
I love conversations about performance, and I'm fortunate enough to have them a lot. The audience varies. A lot of the time it’s a front-end developer or head of engineering, but more and more I’m finding myself in great conversations with product leaders. As great as these discussions can be, I often walk away feeling like there was a better way to streamline the conversation while still conveying my passion for bringing fellow PMs into the world of webperf. I hope this post can serve that purpose and cover a few of the fundamental areas of web performance that I’ve found to be most useful while honing the craft of product management.
So, whether you are a PM or not, if you're new to performance I've put together a few concepts and guidelines you can refer to in order to ramp up quickly. This post covers:
Let's get started...
Getting up to speed on Core Web Vitals seems to be at the top of everyone's to-do list these days. Just in time for the holidays, we are happy to bring you our new Vitals dashboard to help you get a huge jumpstart.
We love to visualize performance data (in case you haven't heard). We love it even more when we can be true to one of our biggest motivations at SpeedCurve: leveraging both RUM and Synthetic data to help you take action on what matters most.
We’ve been pretty vocal about Core Web Vitals since Google announced this initiative last spring. We love the idea of having a lean, shared set of metrics that we can all rally around – not to mention having a broader conversation about web performance that includes teams throughout an organization.
For many site owners, the increased focus on Core Web Vitals is driven by the fact that Google will be including them as a factor in search ranking in May 2021. Other folks are more interested in distilling the extremely large barrel of performance metrics into an easily digested trinity of guidelines to follow in order to provide a delightful user experience.
We’ve had some time to evaluate and explore these metrics, and we're committed to transparently discussing their pros and cons.
The purpose of this post is to explore First Input Delay (FID). This metric is unique among the three Web Vitals in that it is can only be measured using real user monitoring (RUM), while the other two (Largest Contentful Paint and Cumulative Layout Shift) can be measured using both RUM and synthetic monitoring.
In this post we'll cover:
Let's dig in!
Back in May, we shared that SpeedCurve supports Google's Core Web Vitals in both our synthetic monitoring and real user monitoring tools. Two of the Web Vitals – Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) and First Input Delay (FID) – were actually available in SpeedCurve for quite a while prior to the announcement. The newcomer to the scene was Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS), and, not surprisingly, it's the metric that's gotten the most questions.
A few of the questions I've been asked (or asked myself) about Cumulative Layout Shift:
Six months in, I've had a chance to gather and look at a lot of data, talk with customers, and learn from our friends in the performance community. Here's what I've learned so far.
One of the big challenges with Google's new Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) metric is understanding which elements actually moved on the page, when they moved, and by how much. To help with debugging your CLS scores, we've added a new visualization to SpeedCurve that shows each layout shift and how each individual shift adds up to the final cumulative metric.
For each layout shift, we show you the filmstrip frame right before and right after the shift. We then draw a red box around the elements that moved, highlighting exactly which elements caused the shift. The Layout Shift Score for each shift also helps you understand the impact of that shift and how it adds to the cumulative score.
Is your site fast? Adding to a string of recent announcements including Lighthouse v6 and Core Web Vitals, Google has introduced Fast page labelling in Chrome 85 for Android. If you are curious about what this means for your site and how you can get in front of it, read on!
I’m really excited to have become the latest member of the SpeedCurve family. I’ve known Mark for 20 years, since he started lecturing in design here in New Zealand. I was one of his first students and we’ve always kept in touch. Our careers have overlapped at various points, it’s the nature of a small country with an even smaller web design industry. I remember attending the Webstock conference where Mark first presented SpeedCurve in the Start-Up Alley competition. He won, netting the prize money and a trip to the USA to present his new startup. We all know how relevant and useful his startup has become and I’m thrilled to have this opportunity to get involved in its development.