A Complete Guide to Web Performance Budgets
It's easier to make a fast website than it is to keep a website fast. If you've invested countless hours in speeding up your site, but you're not using performance budgets to prevent regressions, you could be at risk of wasting all your efforts.
In this post we'll cover how to:
- Use performance budgets to fight regressions
- Understand the difference between performance budgets and performance goals
- Identify which metrics to track
- Validate your metrics to make sure they're measuring what you think they are – and to see how they correlate with your user experience and business metrics
- Determine what your budget thresholds should be
- Focus on the pages that matter most
- Get buy-in from different stakeholders in your organization
- Integrate with your CI/CD process
- Synthesize your synthetic and real user monitoring data
- Maintain your budgets
This bottom of this post also contains a collection of case studies from companies that are using performance budgets to stay fast.
Let's get started!
Hello INP! Here's everything you need to know about the newest Core Web Vital
After years of development and testing, Google has added Interaction to Next Paint (INP) to its trifecta of Core Web Vitals – the performance metrics that are a key ingredient in its search ranking algorithm. INP replaces First Input Delay (FID) as the Vitals responsiveness metric.
Not sure what INP means or why it matters? No worries – that's what this post is for. :)
- What is INP?
- Why has it replaced First Input Delay?
- How does INP correlate with user behaviour metrics, such as conversion rate?
- What you need to know about INP on mobile devices
- How to debug and optimize INP
And at the bottom of this post, we'll wrap thing up with some inspiring case studies from companies that have found that improving INP has improved sales, pageviews, and bounce rate.
Let's dive in!
Debugging Interaction to Next Paint (INP)
Not surprisingly, most of the conversations I've had with SpeedCurve users over the last few months have focused on improving INP.
INP measures how responsive a page is to visitor interactions. It measures the elapsed time between a tap, a click, or a keypress and the browser next painting to the screen.
INP breaks down into three sub-parts
- Input Delay – How long the interaction handler has to wait before executing
- Processing Time – How long the interaction handler takes to execute
- Presentation Delay – How long it takes the browser to execute any work it needs to paint updates triggered by the interaction handler
Pages can have multiple interactions, so the INP time you'll see reported by RUM products and other tools, such as Google Search Console and Chrome's UX Report (CrUX), will generally be the worst/highest INP time at the 75th percentile.
Like all Core Web Vitals, INP has a set of thresholds:
INP thresholds for Good, Needs Improvement, and Poor
Many sites tend to be in the Needs Improvement or Poor categories. My experience over the last few months is that getting to Good is achievable, but it's not always easy.
In this post I'm going to walk through:
- How I help people identify the causes of poor INP times
- Examples of some of the most common issues
- Approaches I've used to help sites improve their INP
How to use Server Timing to get backend transparency from your CDN
80% of end-user response time is spent on the front end.
That performance golden rule still holds true today. However, that pesky 20% on the back end can have a big impact on downstream metrics like First Contentful Paint (FCP), Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), and any other 'loading' metric you can think of.
Server-timing headers are a key tool in understanding what's happening within that black box of Time to First Byte (TTFB).
In this post we'll explore a few areas:
- Look at industry benchmarks to get an idea of how a slow backend influences key metrics, including Core Web Vitals
- Demonstrate how you can use server-timing headers to break down where that time is being spent
- Provide examples of how you can use server-timing headers to get more visibility into your content delivery network (CDN)
- Show how you can capture server-timing headers in SpeedCurve
How to find (and fix!) INP interactions on your pages
Andy Davies – fellow SpeedCurver and web performance consultant extraordinaire – recently shared an impressive Interaction to Next Paint (INP) success:
Andy has promised us a more in-depth post on debugging Interaction to Next Paint. While he's working on that, I'll try not to steal his thunder while I share a tip that may help you identify element(s) causing INP issues for your pages.
Mobile INP performance: The elephant in the room
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:
- The gap between "good" INP for desktop vs mobile
- Working theories as to why mobile INP is so much poorer than desktop INP
- Correlating INP with user behavior and business metrics (like conversion rate)
- How you can track and improve INP for your pages
10 things I love about SpeedCurve (that I think you'll love, too)
This month, SpeedCurve enters double digits with our tenth birthday. We're officially in our tweens! (Cue the mood swings?)
I joined the team in early 2017, and I'm blown away at how quickly the years have flown by. Every day, I marvel at my great luck in getting to work alongside an amazing team to build amazing tools to help amazing people like you!
In the spirit of celebration, I thought it would be fun to round up my ten favourite things to do in SpeedCurve (that I think you'll like, too). Keep scrolling to learn how to:
- Fight regressions and stay fast
- See the impact of performance on your business
- Benchmark your site against your competitors
- Track third parties to make sure they're not quietly hurting performance
- Make sure you're tracking the best metrics for your pages
- Get a prioritized list of performance recommendations
- Bookmark and compare synthetic tests and RUM sessions so you can quickly find and fix performance issues
- Run A/B tests so you see how code changes affect your performance and user engagement metrics
- Get customized weekly reports
- Motivate your team with a wall-mounted monitor showing your favourite charts
Demystifying Cumulative Layout Shift with CLS Windows
As we all know, naming things is hard.
Google's Core Web Vitals are an attempt to help folks new to web performance focus on three key metrics. Not all of these metrics are easy to understand based on their names alone:
- Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) – When the largest visual element on the page renders
- First Input Delay (FID) – How quickly a page responds to a user interaction (FID will be replaced by Interaction to Next Paint in March 2024)
- Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) – How visually stable a page is
Any time a new metric is introduced, it puts the burden on the rest of us to first unpack all the acronyms, and then explore and digest what concepts the words might refer to. This gets even trickier if the acronym stays the same, but the logic and algorithm behind the acronym changes.
In this post, we will dive deeper into Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) and how it has quietly evolved over the years. Because CLS has been around for a while, you may already have some idea of what it represents. Before we go any further, I have a simple question for you:
How do you think Cumulative Layout Shift is measured?
Hold your answer in your head as we explore the depths of CLS. I'm interested if your assumptions were correct, and there's a poll at the bottom of this post I'd love you to answer.
Exploring performance and conversion rates just got easier
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:
- What is a conversion?
- How to track conversions in SpeedCurve
- Using conversion data with performance data for maximum benefit
- Conversion tracking and user privacy
Farewell FID... and hello Interaction to Next Paint!
Today at Google I/O 2023, it was 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.
It's been three years since the Core Web Vitals initiative was kicked off in May 2020. In that time, we've seen people's interest in performance dramatically increase, especially in the world of SEO. It's been hugely helpful to have a simple set of three metrics – focused on loading, interactivity, and responsiveness – that everyone can understand and focus on.
During this time, SpeedCurve has stayed objective when looking at the CWV metrics. When it comes to new performance metrics, it's easy to jump on hype-fuelled bandwagons. While we definitely get excited about emerging metrics, we also approach each new metric with an analytical eye. For example, back in November 2020, we took a closer look at one of the Core Web Vitals, First Input Delay, and found that it was sort of 'meh' overall when it came to meaningfully correlating with actual user behavior.
Now that INP has arrived to dethrone FID as the responsiveness metric for Core Web Vitals, we've turned our eye to scrutinizing its effectiveness.
In this post, we'll take a closer look and attempt to answer:
- What is Interaction to next Paint?
- How does INP compare to FID?
- What is a 'good' INP result?
- Will there be differences between INP collected in RUM vs. Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX)?
- What correlation does INP have with real user behavior?
- When should you start caring about INP?
- How can you see INP for your own site in SpeedCurve?
Onward!
NEW! Lighthouse 10, Core Web Vitals updates, and Interaction to Next Paint
There is a lot of excitement in the world of web performance these days, and April has been no exception! At SpeedCurve, we've been focused on staying on top of the items that affect you the most.
Here is a look at what's new in SpeedCurve:
- Support for Lighthouse 10, including metric scoring changes as well as audits
- Updated RUM Core Web Vitals, including the much-anticipated addition of Interaction to Next Paint (INP)
All of this work driven by the community is having a big impact in our collective goal to make performance accessible for everyone.
Read on to learn more about these exciting changes!
Element Timing: One true metric to rule them all?
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:
- When was the largest element displayed? Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) measures when the largest visual element (image or video) finishes rendering.
- How much did the content move around as it loads? Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) measures the visual stability of a page.
- How responsive was the page to visitors' actions? First Input Delay (FID) measures how quickly a page responds to a user interaction, such as a click/tap or keypress.
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.
The (potential) problems with Largest Contentful Paint
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.
The LCP element can vary for first-time vs repeat visitors
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
Understanding the performance impact of anti-flicker snippets
Experimentation tools that use asynchronous scripts – such as Google Optimize, Adobe Target, and Visual Web Optimizer – recommend using an anti-flicker snippet to hide the page until they've finished executing. But this practice comes with some performance measurement pitfalls:
- Hiding the contents of the page can have a dramatic effect on the Web Vitals that measure visual experience, such as First Contentful Paint (FCP) and Largest Contentful Paint (LCP)
- Anti-flicker snippets can also affect Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) and the synthetic equivalent of First Input Delay (FID), Total Blocking Time (TBT).
In this post we'll look at how anti-flicker snippets work, their impact on Web Vitals, and how to measure the delay they add to visitors' experience.
SEO and web performance: What to measure and how to optimize
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:
- Core Web Vitals, as a premise, are here to stay for a while.
- The metrics that comprise Web Vitals are still evolving.
- These metrics will (I think) always be in a state of evolution. That's a good thing. We need to do our best to stay up to date – not just with which metrics to track, but also with what they measure and why they're important.
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:
- How much does web performance matter when it comes to SEO?
- Which performance metrics should you focus on for SEO?
- What can you do to make your pages faster for SEO purposes?
- What are some of the common issues that can hurt your Web Vitals?
- How can you track performance for SEO?
UPDATE: Bookmark and compare synthetic tests
One of the huge benefits of tracking web performance over time is the ability to see trends and compare metrics. Last year we added new functionality that makes it easy for you to bookmark and compare different synthetic tests in your test history. We recently added some additional enhancements to make comparing tests even easier.
With the 'Compare' feature, you can generate side-by-side comparisons that let you not only spot regressions, but easily identify what caused them:
- Compare the same page at different points in time
- Compare two versions of the same page – for example, one with ads and one without
- Understand which metrics got better or worse
- Identify which common requests got bigger/smaller or slower/faster
- Spot any new or unique requests – such as JavaScript and images – and see their impact on performance
Along the way, we've also made it much more intuitive for you to drill down into your detailed synthetic test results. Let's take a look...
NEW: Lighthouse v8 support!
After Google's announcement about Lighthouse 8 this past month, we have updated our test agents. We've gotten a lot of questions about what has changed and the impact on your performance metrics, so here's a summary.
Web Performance for Product Managers
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:
- What makes a page slow?
- How is performance measured?
- What do the different metrics mean?
- Understanding percentiles and how to use them
- How to communicate performance to different stakeholders
Let's get started...
An Opinionated Guide to Performance Budgets
Performance budgets are one of those ideas that everyone gets behind conceptually, but then are challenged to put into practice – and for very good reason. Web pages are unbelievably complex, and there are hundreds of different metrics available to track. If you're just getting started with performance budgets – or if you've been using them for a while and want to validate your work – this post is for you.
What is a performance budget?
A performance budget is a threshold that you apply to the metrics you care about the most. You can then configure your monitoring tools to send you alerts – or even break the build, if you're testing in your staging environment – when your budgets are violated.
Understanding the basic premise of performance budgets is pretty easy. The tricky part comes when you try to put them into practice. This is when you run into three important questions:
- Which metrics should you focus on?
- What should your budget thresholds be?
- How do you stay on top of your budgets?
Depending on whom you ask, you could get very different answers to these questions. Here are mine.
New! Vitals Dashboard
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.
First Input Delay: How vital is it?
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:
- What is FID?
- What does FID look like across the web?
- The importance of measuring user interactions
- How JavaScript affects user behavior
- Suggestions for how you can look at FID in relation to your other key metrics
Let's dig in!
