Searchlab Speed & Performance
Slow sites lose people before the page finishes drawing, and on mobile networks the gap is brutal. We measure what your actual visitors experience, find the specific bottleneck on each template, and fix it. No vague promises about a green score on one test run.
We separate field data from lab data, because they answer different questions. Field data from the Chrome User Experience Report and Search Console shows what real visitors on real devices experienced over the past 28 days, and that is what Google reports. Lab tools such as Lighthouse and WebPageTest reproduce a single controlled run, useful for diagnosis and for verifying a fix. Optimising only the lab score is how sites end up fast in testing and slow in life.
Largest Contentful Paint is usually a hero image or heading. Common fixes: preload the LCP image and set fetchpriority to high, never lazy load it, serve it as AVIF or WebP at the exact rendered size with a proper srcset, and cut server response time with page caching so time to first byte stays low. Render blocking CSS and third party scripts in the head delay everything, so critical CSS goes inline and the rest loads asynchronously.
Interaction to Next Paint measures responsiveness, and it is almost always a JavaScript problem. We audit long tasks in the performance profile, break work over 50 milliseconds into smaller chunks, defer non essential scripts, remove unused code, and consolidate tag manager containers that quietly stack chat widgets, heatmaps, review scripts and three analytics tools on the main thread. Cumulative Layout Shift is more mechanical: set explicit width and height on images and embeds, reserve space for ads and banners, self host fonts with font-display swap and preload them, and stop injecting cookie bars above existing content.
Delivery matters as much as the code. Brotli compression, HTTP/2 or HTTP/3, long cache lifetimes on static assets with hashed filenames, a CDN with edge caching near your audience, and full page caching on dynamic platforms. There is an SEO angle too. Faster crawling means more pages fetched per crawl session, which helps large sites get new content indexed. Page experience is a modest ranking input, but the conversion and crawl benefits are the stronger business case.
Everything in Speed & Performance
Performance audit
Field data from CrUX and Search Console alongside lab runs per template, with the specific bottleneck named for each page type rather than a generic score.
Prioritised fix list
Every issue ranked by expected impact against effort, so the two or three changes that move the metric happen before the cosmetic ones.
Image pipeline
AVIF and WebP conversion, correct dimensions, responsive srcset, lazy loading below the fold and eager high priority loading for the LCP element.
Script and third party audit
A full inventory of tags, widgets and trackers with their measured main thread cost, plus recommendations on what to defer, consolidate or remove.
Caching and CDN configuration
Page and object caching, Brotli, cache headers on static assets, CDN edge rules and a purge strategy that does not break deployments.
Font and CSS optimisation
Self hosted subset fonts with swap behaviour and preload, critical CSS inlined, unused rules removed and render blocking requests eliminated.
Layout stability fixes
Dimension attributes on media, reserved space for dynamic elements, and repositioned banners and notices so content stops jumping during load.
Before and after report
Measured results across key templates on mobile and desktop, plus ongoing monitoring so regressions surface within days rather than at the next audit.
The process
Measure
Collect 28 day field data per URL group, run lab tests on each template at mobile throttling, and record a baseline for LCP, INP, CLS and time to first byte.
Diagnose
Trace each failing metric to its cause through waterfall and main thread analysis. We name the exact resource, script or style rule responsible, not a category.
Fix
Apply changes on staging in impact order, from server response and images through to scripts and layout stability, verifying each one before moving to the next.
Verify and monitor
Re test in lab, then track field data as it refreshes over the following weeks. Monitoring alerts on regressions caused by new tags, plugins or content.
Questions about Speed & Performance
Does site speed actually affect Google rankings?
It is a ranking input, but a modest one, and relevance still dominates. The honest case for speed is commercial: faster pages hold more visitors, lift conversion on mobile, and improve return on ad spend because fewer paid clicks bounce before render. For large sites there is also a crawl efficiency benefit, which affects how quickly new pages get indexed.
Can you guarantee a score of 90 or higher?
No, and be careful with anyone who does. Scores depend on test conditions, and some cost comes from tools you may want to keep, such as chat widgets or marketing tags. We commit to measurable improvement on the real user metrics, and we will show you exactly what each remaining third party script costs you so the trade off is your decision.
How long do fixes take to show in Search Console?
Field data in the Core Web Vitals report is a rolling 28 day window, so a fix deployed today only shows fully after about four weeks. Lab tests confirm the change immediately. We track both, so you can see the improvement right away while the official report catches up.
Will optimisation break how the site looks?
It should not. Everything is done on staging and reviewed visually before deployment. The changes that carry risk are removing unused CSS and deferring scripts, so we test those template by template, including forms, sliders and any interactive elements. If a tag has to go, we flag it and get your sign off rather than silently deleting it.
Ready to talk about Speed & Performance?
Tell us where you are stuck. We reply within the hour on WhatsApp, usually sooner.
Or email Searchlabtools@gmail.com