This free website speed test runs a full Google Lighthouse audit on any public URL and returns four 0–100 scores — performance, accessibility, best practices and SEO — plus lab Core Web Vitals like LCP and CLS. Pick mobile or desktop and get a fresh run every time. No signup, no credit card: enter a URL above to start.
Reviewed by Charles Duncan, Co-founder & CTOUnder the hood the tool asks Google's PageSpeed Insights API to audit the URL you enter, then renders the Lighthouse report it returns in Google's official Lighthouse Viewer — the same engine and the same scoring Chrome DevTools uses, executed on Google's infrastructure instead of your laptop.
Paste any publicly reachable URL — a homepage, a product page, a blog post. No account, no site verification, no tag to install.
Mobile runs on a throttled mid-range phone profile, desktop on a fast wired connection, so the two are not comparable. Pick the one your traffic uses, and tick the categories you want scored.
The complete Lighthouse report opens on the page: four scores, the lab metrics behind them, and a ranked list of opportunities with the seconds each fix is estimated to save.
Everything in this grid runs right now, without an account. The marked features unlock when you create a free SEOmator account.
Performance, accessibility, best practices and SEO are all graded in the same run — so a fast page that quietly fails accessibility can't hide behind one number.
LCP and CLS come back with every run, alongside Total Blocking Time — the lab stand-in for INP, which can only be measured on real visitors.
Mobile is deliberately throttled; desktop is not. Run both — the gap between the two scores is usually where the real problem lives.
Lighthouse estimates how much load time each fix would return, so you work the list from the top instead of guessing which change matters.
The report lists each individual Lighthouse audit with its result and an explanation — not just the headline score and a marketing summary.
Each test triggers a new audit against the live page. Nothing is served from a score somebody else generated last month.
Track how performance moves release to release, instead of comparing screenshots you took by hand.
Get told when a release slows a page down, rather than discovering it weeks later in a ranking report.
Run all 251 audit rules across your whole site, with issues prioritized by impact instead of one URL at a time.
Create a free SEOmator account to track speed over time, get alerts on regressions, and audit every page instead of one.
Sign up free
Reviewed byCharles Duncan · Co-founder & CTOI run the crawler and audit engine here, so I read a lot of Lighthouse reports. This tool hands you Google's own verdict: the real Lighthouse report, Google's scoring, in one click and without an account. The honest limitation is that it is lab data: one simulated load from Google's infrastructure, not what your visitors actually experienced. When we ran 115 Google page-1 results through the same engine on 1 October 2026, the median mobile score was 45 and position showed no measurable link to the score. So treat the number as a diagnostic, not a ranking forecast, and confirm any fix with field data in Google Search Console before you tell anyone the site got faster.
Charles Duncan · Co-founder & CTOAcross 115 Google page-1 results we tested on 1 October 2026, only 8.7% painted their main content within 2.5 seconds in the lab, and LCP plus Total Blocking Time carry 55% of the Performance score. If you only ever fix one thing, fix whatever paints last.
Lighthouse throttles mobile hard on purpose. A 94 on desktop next to a 41 on mobile is normal, not a bug — and mobile is the version Google indexes.
INP replaced First Input Delay as a Core Web Vital in March 2024, and it can only be measured on real visitors. TBT is its closest lab proxy: when TBT is high here, INP is the field metric to go and check.
Each opportunity carries an estimated saving in seconds. Do the top one, re-run the test, and see whether the estimate held. Two or three short passes beat one speculative rewrite.
The scores are bucketed: 0–49 poor, 50–89 needs improvement, 90–100 good. Going from 92 to 98 changes nothing a user or a crawler will notice. Going from 38 to 72 changes everything.
Homepages are usually the most optimized page on a site. Test a product page or a long article instead — that's where the unsized hero images and the fourth analytics script actually live.
Run the page through Lighthouse on a mobile profile and read the Performance score together with the metrics underneath it. That is what the test above does: it sends your URL to Google's PageSpeed Insights engine and opens the full Lighthouse report on this page, the same engine Chrome DevTools uses.
Four tools cover almost every real question, and they measure different things:
| Tool | What it measures | Use it to |
|---|---|---|
| This speed test | One Lighthouse lab run, mobile or desktop | Diagnose a single page |
| PageSpeed Insights | The same lab run plus 28 days of Chrome field data | See what real visitors got |
| Search Console Core Web Vitals report | Field data grouped by URL pattern | Find site-wide problems |
| Chrome DevTools Performance panel | A full trace on your own machine | Debug one slow interaction |
The habit worth breaking is treating one Lighthouse score as the verdict. It is one simulated load. The other three tools tell you whether that load resembles what your visitors actually experience.
Slower than most speed guides imply. On 1 October 2026 we ran mobile Lighthouse (version 13.5, simulated throttling, the configuration this test uses) on 115 page-1 results for 15 commercial US keywords, from CRM software to robot vacuums. The median performance score was 45. Only 7.8% scored 90 or above, and 59.1% scored below 50, the band Lighthouse calls poor.
| Mobile Lighthouse score | Share of 115 page-1 results |
|---|---|
| 90–100 (good) | 7.8% |
| 50–89 (needs improvement) | 33.0% |
| 0–49 (poor) | 59.1% |
The lab Largest Contentful Paint numbers were just as unflattering: a median of 10.0 seconds, with only 8.7% of pages painting their main content within 2.5 seconds. Read that with its caveat. These are lab runs from one machine, two at a time, under Lighthouse's simulated slow mobile profile, so absolute times run higher than a fast connection would see.
We checked the method against Google's own numbers. Our homepage, run the same way, scored 67 with a 7.8-second LCP; PageSpeed Insights gave it 63 and 8.1 seconds the same morning. The setup tracks Google's scoring closely. It just doesn't flatter anyone, us included.
Yes, as one signal among many, and our data shows how small it is next to relevance. Google says plainly that "Core Web Vitals are used by our ranking systems", and in the same document that "Google Search always seeks to show the most relevant content, even if the page experience is sub-par" (Google Search Central).
Our 1 October check is consistent with that. Across the 115 page-1 results, position and Lighthouse score were unrelated (Spearman's ρ = 0.04, not statistically significant). Results in positions 1–3 had a median score of 44; positions 8–10 had 43. The #1 result was the fastest page on its results page for just one of 14 keywords, fewer than you would expect by chance.
So don't expect a ranking jump from turning a 70 into a 95. The bigger payoff is the visitor. Vodafone A/B-tested a landing page whose field LCP was 31% better and saw 8% more sales (web.dev case study). Speed earns its keep in conversions first and rankings a distant second, and the ranking effect shows up mainly when a page is badly slow, not when it's merely average. For the longer version of that argument, see how load speed affects SEO.
Each category is scored 0–100, and the bands are the same for all four: 0–49 is poor, 50–89 needs improvement, 90–100 is good.
Performance is a weighted blend of five lab metrics. Since Lighthouse 10 the weights are fixed (Chrome for Developers):
| Metric | What it captures | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Total Blocking Time | How long the main thread was too busy to respond | 30% |
| Largest Contentful Paint | When the main content appeared | 25% |
| Cumulative Layout Shift | How much the layout jumped | 25% |
| First Contentful Paint | When anything first appeared | 10% |
| Speed Index | How quickly the visible page filled in | 10% |
Two things follow. TBT and LCP carry 55% of the score between them, so they're where the points are. And a page can paint quickly and still score badly if heavy JavaScript keeps the main thread busy afterwards.
Accessibility, Best Practices and SEO are checklists rather than timings. The SEO category checks basics a crawler needs, such as a title, a meta description, a crawlable status code and readable links. A 100 there means nothing is broken at that level. It says nothing about how well the page will rank.
Field data counts for Google; lab data is how you find out why. Google judges Core Web Vitals on real visits, and web.dev sets the bar plainly: "a good threshold to measure is the 75th percentile of page loads, segmented across mobile and desktop devices" (web.dev).
The thresholds Google uses are LCP within 2.5 seconds, Interaction to Next Paint under 200 milliseconds and Cumulative Layout Shift under 0.1. This test is a lab run, so it reports LCP and CLS directly. INP needs a real person clicking and typing, which a lab run can't do; Total Blocking Time is the closest stand-in. When TBT is high here, INP is the field number to go and check.
When the two disagree, trust the field. A lab run on a fast page can miss a slow third-party script that only loads for some visitors, and a slow lab run can overstate a page whose real audience sits on fast connections. Field data appears in PageSpeed Insights and Search Console only once a page or site has enough Chrome traffic. For a quieter page, the lab run is the evidence you have.
Because much of the variation is not the test. Google's own documentation says "a lot of the variability in your overall Performance score and metric values is not due to Lighthouse": network routing, server load, A/B tests, rotating ads and third-party scripts all change between runs.
We saw it on our own homepage: 63 in PageSpeed Insights and 67 in our own run, on the same page, the same morning. That four-point gap is ordinary.
Three habits make the number usable:
Fix whatever delays the largest element first, because that is where the score and the visitor's patience both run out. Work down this order:
fetchpriority="high", and 16.3% lazy-loaded the very image that decided their LCP. Our guide to Largest Contentful Paint covers the fixes element by element.We hold our own pages to the same list. When we ran seomator.com through this test, the top two items in the report were 253 KiB of unused JavaScript and render-blocking requests worth an estimated 150 ms. Those are the first two things on our own list.
Five honest limits, so you know when to reach for something else.
What your visitors actually experienced. This is a lab run. For field data, use PageSpeed Insights or the Core Web Vitals report in Search Console. If a page keeps failing there, our guide to fixing a failed Core Web Vitals assessment walks through it.
Anything behind a login or after an interaction. The test loads one public URL once. Checkout steps, dashboards and menus that open on click are out of reach.
Interaction to Next Paint. It needs real input. Total Blocking Time is a proxy, not a measurement.
Speed from a particular country. The run happens on Google's infrastructure, and you can't choose its location.
The rest of your site. One URL is one URL. A full site audit checks every page, and the mobile-friendly test covers how a page renders on a phone.
A prospect's site feels slow but they want proof, not an opinion. Run their key landing page on mobile in front of them and let Google's own report make the argument for you.
Before a release ships, test the template you changed and compare it against the current live page. A regression costs minutes to find now and weeks to find later.
Your best-converting article has slipped. Check whether the page simply got heavier — a new embed, a hero image nobody sized — before you rewrite copy that was working fine.
The report is the real Lighthouse output from Google's PageSpeed Insights, rendered in Google's official viewer — the same scoring you'd get in Chrome DevTools.
The full report opens right on the page. We don't hold your score hostage for an email address.
Every audit, diagnostic and opportunity is there to read, instead of three cherry-picked metrics and an upsell.
Mobile and desktop are separate runs, because a desktop score tells you almost nothing about the traffic Google actually indexes.
The page-1 numbers on this page come from our own Lighthouse runs on 115 ranking results (1 October 2026), dated and rerunnable, not a borrowed industry average. The same team builds SEOmator's site audit.
One of 29 free SEO tools, from a complete site audit to a mobile-friendly test.
Website speed is one of the first things a visitor judges, usually before they read a word. It is also where most pages fall short: when we ran 115 Google page-1 results through mobile Lighthouse on 1 October 2026, 59.1% scored below 50, and only 8.7% showed their main content within 2.5 seconds.
Website speed is a ranking factor in Google's search algorithm, so a faster website is more likely to rank higher in search results. In addition, a slow-loading website can lead to higher bounce rates and lower engagement, which can negatively impact your SEO.
Some common causes of slow website speed include large image files, poor code and server optimization, and a high number of requests made to the server.
There are several tools available for testing the speed of your website, including Google's PageSpeed Insights, GTmetrix, and WebPageTest. These tools will provide you with a variety of performance metrics, such as page load time, time to first byte, and number of requests made to the server.
There are several ways to improve the speed of your website, including optimizing images and other elements, reducing the number of requests made to the server, and implementing browser caching. Additionally, you can improve the speed of your website by optimizing your code and server, as well as using a Content Delivery Network (CDN).
Core Web Vitals are a set of metrics that measure the user experience of a website, specifically related to loading speed, responsiveness, and visual stability. These metrics are considered important indicators of a website's overall performance and user experience. Google announced in May 2021 that Core Web Vitals would be used as a ranking signal, and the set has changed since: Interaction to Next Paint replaced First Input Delay in March 2024.
Google's Core Web Vitals thresholds are the practical answer: Largest Contentful Paint under 2.5 seconds, Interaction to Next Paint under 200 milliseconds, and Cumulative Layout Shift under 0.1, each measured at the 75th percentile of real visits. Clearing all three puts a page in the "good" band. It is a higher bar than it sounds: in our 1 October 2026 lab test of 115 Google page-1 results, only 8.7% painted their main content within 2.5 seconds on mobile.
Lighthouse groups its 0–100 scores into three bands: 0–49 is poor (red), 50–89 needs improvement (orange), and 90–100 is good (green). Ninety and above is the target, but the band matters far more than the exact number — moving a page from 38 to 72 is a change users feel, while 92 to 98 is mostly noise. Scores also vary by a few points between runs on the same URL because the audit simulates network and CPU conditions, so compare bands rather than decimals.
Speed Index measures how quickly the visible part of the page fills in during load. Lighthouse scores it green at 0–3.4 seconds on mobile and 0–1.3 seconds on desktop; above 5.8 seconds on mobile, or 2.3 seconds on desktop, it turns red. It carries 10% of the Performance score, so a poor Speed Index is worth fixing but rarely the main reason a score is low.
Largest Contentful Paint measures how long the biggest visible element takes to render — loading speed. Interaction to Next Paint measures how quickly the page responds to taps and clicks across the whole visit — responsiveness; it replaced First Input Delay as a Core Web Vital in March 2024. Cumulative Layout Shift measures how much content jumps around while the page loads — visual stability. INP needs real visitors to measure, so a lab test like this one reports Total Blocking Time as its closest stand-in.
Lab data. Each run is a single simulated page load from Google's infrastructure — a throttled mid-range phone on mobile, a fast wired connection on desktop — which is exactly what makes the results repeatable and comparable between two versions of a page. It is not what your visitors experienced. For that you need field data: the Core Web Vitals report in Google Search Console or the Chrome User Experience Report, both drawn from real Chrome visits over the previous 28 days. Use the lab report to find and fix problems, and field data to confirm the fix reached real users.
Deeper reading from the SEOmator blog on what this tool measures.
· 12 min read
Page load speed directly impacts both SEO rankings and user engagement. Learn how Core Web Vitals (LCP, INP, CLS) affect your search visibility, why 53% of mobile visitors abandon slow sites, and proven optimization strategies to boost performance.
· 12 min read
Median loaded latency is 257ms — the INP budget is 200ms. Before your JavaScript runs a single line, the network has already spent the whole allowance. The speed numbers that actually decide your Core Web Vitals.
· 13 min read
Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), explained with fresh data: of 115 Google page-1 results we tested in October 2026, only 8.7% hit 2.5 s. Here's what to fix.
Elevate your online presence with our tool: Get found, Get ahead
