Response Time
24 — 48 hours
When adding the ES login box module on a page, the ES site-3.2.21.min.js script automatically included. This file is 1.1Mb in size and is a blocking script, being neither deferred or loaded async.
So including a simple ES login module has a significant and disproportionate impact on page loading times & page rankings.
I have included 2 snapshots of Google lighthouse scores, with ES Login box enabled and with it disabled.
As you can see, the impact is very significant, being the difference between failing Googles Core Vitals test (and hence Search ranking penalties) and passing the test.
On top of that, the login box adds 4.6s to the "Time to first interaction" score, moving from 5.6s to a whopping 10.2s on mobile.
We need to only load the relevant login portions of the site.min.js file, not the entire script?
Otherwise using the login box on any page other than an ES page has a major negative impact on the user experience and page ranking scores.
So including a simple ES login module has a significant and disproportionate impact on page loading times & page rankings.
I have included 2 snapshots of Google lighthouse scores, with ES Login box enabled and with it disabled.
As you can see, the impact is very significant, being the difference between failing Googles Core Vitals test (and hence Search ranking penalties) and passing the test.
On top of that, the login box adds 4.6s to the "Time to first interaction" score, moving from 5.6s to a whopping 10.2s on mobile.
We need to only load the relevant login portions of the site.min.js file, not the entire script?
Otherwise using the login box on any page other than an ES page has a major negative impact on the user experience and page ranking scores.
10 Replies
The replies under this section are restricted to logged in users or users with an active subscription with us
