Core Web Vitals:
fixed for real, not just for the test tool
A lot of speed 'fixes' chase the testing tool's score and fall apart on a real phone over real mobile data. We fix the actual causes: render-blocking scripts, unoptimised images, layout shift from late-loading elements. Then we verify on field data, not a lab report that looked good once.
A green score, a slow phone
A site passes a quick speed test with a good score and still feels slow to a real visitor on a mid-range phone over 4G. The test ran on a fast connection in a lab, not under the conditions Google’s field data actually captures. A single blocking third-party script can tank real Core Web Vitals scores while a lab report shows green. So can an unoptimised hero image, or a font that loads late and shifts the layout. Teams sometimes fix the wrong thing, or declare victory too early.
Marketing and analytics tags build up over time in a way nobody audits. A heatmap tool added two years ago for a project that ended. A chat widget nobody uses anymore. Three different analytics platforms all firing on every page load. Each one adds render-blocking weight, and no single tag looks like the obvious culprit on its own.
How we fix it
We test on throttled networks and real device profiles, not just a desktop lab run, to see what an actual visitor experiences. We find and fix the specific causes of a poor Largest Contentful Paint, usually an unoptimised hero image or a blocking script. Cumulative Layout Shift, usually late-loading ads, fonts or embeds without reserved space. And poor interaction responsiveness.
Every third-party script gets audited and ranked by actual measured performance cost, not by assumption. The tag everyone suspects, usually the biggest, most visible widget, is sometimes fine. A small, forgotten script nobody thinks about can turn out to be the real bottleneck once measured properly.
What we need from you
Access to the live site, ideally a staging environment where fixes can be tested without risk. A developer contact, if template-level changes are needed and your own team will implement them instead of us. Point us to whoever owns your marketing tag stack. Removing or deferring a script is sometimes a two-minute change, and sometimes breaks a reporting pipeline someone relies on. We would rather check with that person than guess.
What you see in the report
Largest Contentful Paint, Cumulative Layout Shift and Interaction to Next Paint. Real field data over the 28-day window Google actually uses, not a single lab score, reported before and after. We report the specific pages that improved versus the ones that did not move. A site-wide average can hide a template that is still slow even while the overall number looks better, and that matters more for conversion than the average.
Price and timeline
| Option | Price | What it covers | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Launch or audit | from $600 | Real-device audit, fix list, template-level fixes where possible | 1 to 2 weeks |
| Monthly management | from $500 / month | Ongoing monitoring and fixes as new pages, scripts or widgets are added | monthly, no lock-in |
| Full control, handover to your team | from $1,600 | Full audit and fixes, documented for your developer to maintain going forward | 2 weeks |
Related
Speed work pays back fastest right after a migration or redesign, since that is when new render-blocking scripts and unoptimised assets get introduced in the first place. We recommend running this check as a standard step after any significant platform or template change, rather than waiting for a complaint. This pairs with technical SEO audit for the broader crawl and indexing picture, and with SEO migration without traffic loss when speed issues come from a recent replatform. Full services: SEO and content and development. We hold systems to this field-data level of scrutiny in the analytics warehouse case study. Get in touch with your URL and we will run a real-device check before you pay for anything.
FAQ
How much do Core Web Vitals fixes cost?
From $600 for an audit and fix list on a standard site. Implementation is often included if changes are template-level. Custom development is quoted separately if it needs deeper platform changes.
Will this guarantee better rankings?
Core Web Vitals is one of many ranking factors, not the dominant one. It helps most on close calls between similar-quality pages, and it always helps conversion rate and user experience either way.
How long until the score improves?
Lab score changes show up right after a fix deploys. The field data Google actually uses for ranking, the real-user 28-day window, takes about a month to fully reflect a fix.
Why do some fixes need a developer?
Changes to how a page loads scripts, images or fonts at the template level usually need code access. We draw a clear line in the fix list between what we can apply ourselves and what needs your developer.
What do you need from us?
Access to the live site, ideally a staging environment to test fixes safely. A developer contact too, if template-level changes are needed and your own team will implement them.