The user tries to click something whilst the page is still loading. This lag will be considerable. On the other hand, if that click happens much later. It’s likely the page will be in a good position to respond quickly. The incentive here, then, is to delay the user’s first click. Although this is counterintuitive, it can actually be a good thing, because it pushes us away from having pop-ups and. Other elements that block access to content. However, if we really want to be cynical, then. We could actually optimize for this metric by making elements harder to click, or initially non-interactive.
Canonical If They’re Not Willing To Consider
By making navigation elements a more EL Salvador Phone Number List frustrating experience, we would buy time for the page to finish loading. On top of this, it’s worth remembering that FID cannot be measur in the lab, because it requires that human element. Instead, Moz Pro and other lab suites (including Google’s) use Total Blocking Time, which is closer to approximating what would happen if a user immiately tri to click something. Overall, I think this metric isn’t as unfair a comparison as Largest Contentful Paint, because gaming the system here is slightly more of a shot in one’s own foot.
Them A Duplicate Then You Might Have
It’s still potentially an unfair comparison, in that DT Leads navigational pages will have a harder time than content pages (because on a navigational, hub, or category page, users want to click quite soon). But it could be argu that navigation pages are worse search results anyway, so perhaps, giving Google an XXL serving of the benefit of the doubt, that could be deliberate. Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) And lastly, there’s Cumulative Layout Shift, another metric which seems intuitively good — we all hate it when pages shift around whilst we’re trying to read or click something. The devil, though, is once again in the details.