Core Web Vitals

[saladtosser]

Has anyone managed to find a website that passes the core web vitals test? I've tested lots of sites in my niche and looked at other sites I would have thought would pass including SEO news sites that promote CWV like SEJ, SEL but even they fail... Why do sites like SEL publish CWV articles without complying with CWV themselves?

Even more ironic is googles own support document [support.google.com...] doesn't pass either...What's that about?

I would just like to see an actual example of a site that passes this test with flying colours so I can learn from that rather than vague articles telling me how to achieve CWV while being displayed on non-conplient CWV sites like SEL.

[goodroi]

Sounds like you are complaining about being giving too much advance notice. Relax.

Core web vitals is going to start rolling out in May at the earliest. It is unlikely to be a critical ranking factor on day #1. Take a deep breath. Read the articles and improve the technical side of your pages sometime over the next FOUR MONTHS. Don't worry about it today.

[saladtosser]

You know the saying, the early bird catches the worm :)

[robzilla]

Stay out of the red and you'll be fine. And even if you're in the red, if your content is good enough you'll probably also be fine, for now.

You make it seem like CWV is the be-all and end-all. It is not. Some sites have rich content that takes a while to load, others need to be sustained by advertising, and all of these things (and many others) can factor into your CWV scores. All site owners need to maintain a healthy balance between the various factors that determine a site's success. Throw lots of time and money at optimizing your site's performance and you may find it doesn't improve your bottom line all that much. The same time and money spent on improving content or increasing engagement may be more effective. It's also not necessarily easy to improve performance.

WebmasterWorld does pretty well [developers.google.com], by the way.

[saladtosser]

Not worried about it from purely an SEO point of view, being a hand coder technical SEO is an enjoyment for me so eager to learn but I find learning by example better than vague articles mentioning everything I've already implemented 3-4 years ago such as srcset, decent server, compressing images, webp, minimised HTML, minimised CSS, inlined CSS, AMP, HTTP2, custom icon fonts stripped of every icon I don't use. My scores are already way above competitors but I'm a perfectionist.

Really not sure why just because I'm asking a question on WCV people on here have assumed it means I'm neglecting the basics of HTTPS, schema, mobile-friendly, good UX on top of the easiest part of SEO (which I don't even class as SEO because it's obvious), good original text, original photos, original videos, fresh daily content, social outreach.

These are all covered and then some! WCV is behind ALL of these I 100% agree but like I say, these are nailed so I want to put some effort into nailing WCV for a well-rounded approach... Ironically the only things holding my sites scores down are google amp, analytics and Adsense scripts.

[robzilla]

Then you're clearly not the target audience for those articles. Doesn't mean they're not helpful to others. And if the sites reporting on CWV don't get great scores themselves, does that really matter? Often times, the people doing the writing aren't even involved in the technical aspects of running a site. If they are, perhaps it's just not a priority for them, as I've suggested above.

Comparing sites and their scores isn't particularly helpful, and the reality is that some sites are simply never going to get a perfect score.

Tools like PageSpeed Insights give you pretty much all the information you need to improve your own scores. I'd focus on that.

[saladtosser]

>>>And if the sites reporting on CWV don't get great scores themselves, does that really matter?<<<

Depends, would you take healthy eating diet plans written by obese people on McDonald website seriously?

>>>Often times, the people doing the writing aren't even involved in the technical aspects of running a site.<<<

This is true but you would expect the writers they choose to write technical SEO articles to implement good technical standards themselves wouldn't you? FYI I researched the author's sites, they don't.

[saladtosser]

I guess what you have to ask yourself is what would you find more valuable, say for example you wanted to breed a rare marine fish, which would you find more valuable?

An article written by someone on their personal blog with hands-on experience and first-hand proof in achieving the goal.

Or

An article written by someone who has read up about it from others; aggregated the information and published it on a big brand site without ever achieving the goal.

So general knowledge vs knowledge + experience.