I don't understand what Core Web Vitals are, what do they measure, and how much do they affect Google ranking?

lcp 2.5 seconds = a bit slow. good = <2.5 medium = 2.5-4, bad = >4. if there's a large image on the site (hero image), reduce its size use cdn, enable lazy loading.

fid 150ms = average. good = <100 medium = 100-300, bad = >300. if javascript is running heavy (heavy script) defer it, make it async, do code splitting.

cls 0.1 = a bit high but close to good. good = <0.1 medium = 0.1-0.25, bad = >0.25. when page elements shift (when ad loads, when image loads) set explicit width/height.

Correction: I misremembered the figure, it was a bit lower.

our lcp was 3+ seconds initially. i improved hosting (server response time dropped), did image optimization dropped lcp to 1.8 seconds. saw a +2 spot difference in ranking but it's not very certain.

speed is important but honestly content quality makes a bigger difference. like so fast site = longer customer stay time, higher conversion — ranking is a second-level impact.

lcp fid cls are all performance metrics. google wants the site to load fast. if you keep it under 2 seconds google is happy doesn't require much for ranking but it's good overall. 150ms is already very good btw.

core web vitals ranking impact: added as a ranking factor in 2021, but no specific data. estimate: if lcp is bad (-5 spots), if fid is bad (-3 spots), if cls is bad (-2 spots). but this isn't linear — depends on other factors.

i open lighthouse: lcp good fid was good, cls … waiting. google: site speed is important and me: but there's no traffic whatever… google: speed = traffic. true but speed isn't enough.

lcp < 2.5s, fid < 100ms, cls < 0.1 should be. these are the 'good' tier. ranking factor but secondary. content and links are more important.

We got stuck at the same point for a while. A page that answers one question works better than one touching on five topics.

Just leaving this note, it might be useful.

Yes, that's exactly how it is with core web vitals. Map listings bring more business than blog posts for most local businesses.

Internal linking is the cheapest and most neglected task. Good luck with that.

Thanks a lot, I'll try it today. A page with low traffic might be reaching the right people. Look at where sales come from.

Just leaving this note, it might be useful.

I agree. Everyone rushing into core web vitals gets stuck at the same point.

Good luck with that.

We experienced almost the exact same thing last year. If rankings stay the same but clicks drop, the issue isn't your page, but the search result appearance.

I'm also curious if anyone does it differently.

I'm writing this so you don't make the same mistake. When you try to change everything at once, nothing settles.

A page that answers one question works better than one touching on five topics.

I'm a small business let me explain from my side. Taking notes for two weeks yields better results than a six-month estimate.

Proven by experience.

i have an objection here. the harder it is to reverse a decision, the slower you should make it.

Three different views emerged, they all complement each other. People defend habits, not processes. Resistance comes from there.

I'm also curious if anyone does it differently.

You're right, I've been down that road too. If it's your first time, start small; scaling comes later.

If you have questions, write them; I'll answer as best I can.

There's a part I don't understand. Processes without records never improve because you don't know what to fix.

Just leaving this note, it might be useful.

thanks that was the answer I was looking for.