how badly does a CLS Issue effect SEO

[Rlilly]

In GSC there is a new issue showing regarding CLS

The console now says 0% good Urls

How badly does this issue effect SEO and position rankings?

It also takes 28 days after the fixing issues for Google to validate

[Wilburforce]

Well, it needs fixing. It probably affects ranking, but it certainly affects UE.

Your post doesn't tell us what is causing this, but if (a common culprit) some of your content isn't loaded on first paint (or on scroll) to improve speed, your best bet is to use placeholders for everything that is deferred, so that the position of everything on the page remains stable when viewed/scrolled.

[mhansen]

This is just a personal observation and likely anecdotal, but after I corrected CLS issues, the site improved significantly in search over the course of 2-3 months. I attributed it to the focus on all CWV's and speeding up the site load.

Not sure if I am allowed to link or not, but this is a great tool for visualizing your CLS and helps you get directly to the cause of the issue. [webvitals.dev...]

[Rlilly]

"Your post doesn't tell us what is causing this"

I believe the CLS issue is because Images did not have defined dimensions,

[Pjman]

We need more information to help you bro.

Having worked in agency that represents over 1,500 websites, I can easily say that negative CLS score have a 30-40% implication on your rankings. They don't have to be all all Green, but failing will hurt a good bit.

[Rlilly]

@mhansen I used this tool as suggested and pass CLS every time with 0.0001 for almost 3 weeks saying its a good score, However, the site failed in its 28 days for validation for CLS in GSC.

I am suspect about the accuracy of any of these tools

[Pjman]

I found that if you are not using a quality CDN, these tools reports are all over the place. Which makes sense, if your testing two sites A) Hosted In Los Angles B) Hosted In NYC. If the tool is based geographically you will get different results.

[mhansen]

@Rlilly - On my site, it's a toss up based on which pages you check, but 99% of them are 0 or 0.01. I mentioned this elsewhere, I use WordPress primarily, so the homepage, the category landing pages, and the post/page structures, all have different things affecting them when it comes to CLS. Have you checked various pages of your site to assure all types of content are scoring well?

I have also noticed that the 28-historical data is slow to catch up, so if you're only at the end of it right now, it would make sense it still reports a historical slower piece of data. Have you checked the results directly in GSC? (If you use it)

If you're looking for guidance, I'd be happy to take a look and feel free to DM a url.

[Rlilly]

I see lots of sites with FAILED in Google Web Core Vitals... and their CLS is passes. Its a Time to Byte fail.

That seems like a very serious issue and kills small sites. Because most sites are on shared servers and cannot be on a dedicated to solve this issue.

[Rlilly]

Does anyone know about the GOOGLE INSPECTION TOOL along with the Google Bot?

[not2easy]

This was just posted here today: [webmasterworld.com...]
There is a link there for more information.