History & Trends → Severity, Lighthouse and other measures across 16 weeks.
Performance impact
How far pages fall short of Google's "good" benchmarks: Largest Contentful Paint ≤ 2.5s and page weight ≤ 1.6 MB. Lower is better.
Avg extra LCP over 2.5s
8.0s 2/2 pages over
Avg extra weight over 1.6 MB
0.00 MB 14/312 pages over
Set page_loads_per_week for this target to also estimate total wasted time and data (the way daily-dap uses traffic counts).
Medians across sampled pages
Performance
30/100
Accessibility
95/100
Best practices
77/100
SEO
100/100
Agentic browsing
69/100
Largest Contentful Paint
10.5s
First Contentful Paint
3.3s
Speed Index
4.5s
Total Blocking Time
1.0s
Cumulative Layout Shift
0
Recommendations
Issues Lighthouse flagged across the 2 sampled page(s), beyond the headline scores — grouped by category and ranked by how many pages they affect. Estimated savings (transfer bytes or load time) are Lighthouse's own estimates where available. Accessibility audits are intentionally omitted; they overlap with the axe-core findings on the Accessibility page.
Performance
Performance recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Reduce unused JavaScript
2/2
696 KB · 4.0s
Reduce JavaScript execution time
2/2
2.0s
Minimize main-thread work
2/2
2.0s
Reduce unused CSS
2/2
223 KB · 1.5s
Render-blocking requests
2/2
1.4s
Minify JavaScript
2/2
37 KB · 0.1s
Font display
2/2
0.1s
First Contentful Paint
2/2
—
Largest Contentful Paint
2/2
—
Speed Index
2/2
—
Total Blocking Time
2/2
—
Max Potential First Input Delay
2/2
—
Time to Interactive
2/2
—
Layout shift culprits
2/2
—
Network dependency tree
2/2
—
Avoid multiple page redirects
1/2
0.8s
Initial server response time was short
1/2
0.3s
Use efficient cache lifetimes
1/2
0.1s
Document request latency
1/2
0.1s
Minify CSS
1/2
2 KB
Best Practices
Best Practices recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Browser errors were logged to the console
2/2
—
Uses deprecated APIs
2/2
—
Agentic (AI-readiness)
Agentic (AI-readiness) recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Cumulative Layout Shift
2/2
—
WebMCP tools registered
2/2
—
WebMCP form coverage
2/2
—
WebMCP schemas are valid
2/2
—
llms.txt follows recommendations
2/2
—
What the Agentic score means
The Agentic (AI-readiness) score is new in Google Lighthouse (13.4+). It measures how well a page works for AI agents and assistants — the tools that increasingly mediate how people find and use government services. It checks for things like an llms.txt file (a machine-readable guide for language models), valid structured data, a well-formed accessibility tree that agents can parse, and WebMCP tool/form descriptions. A higher score means an AI assistant is more likely to understand the page and complete tasks on a citizen's behalf correctly.
It is experimental and evolving; treat it as a forward-looking signal, not a compliance requirement. Median across sampled pages: 69/100.
Gaps found on the sampled pages: Cumulative Layout Shift (2), WebMCP tools registered (2), WebMCP form coverage (2), WebMCP schemas are valid (2), llms.txt follows recommendations (2).
Per-page results
Lighthouse scores and Core Web Vitals per sampled page (2026-W39). Agentic = experimental agentic-browsing score. PWA / offline readiness is tracked in the Standards tab (Lighthouse 12+ removed the PWA category). — click a column heading to sort