faz.net website review

67 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (1.2 MB).

About 262 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 1.1 s faster on a phone.

Your mobile performance score is 20 (desktop: 57). Under 50 is Google's “poor” band: many phone visitors leave before the page is usable.

The page has 5,891 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

A phone's processor spends 4.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 1.9 s of it running JavaScript. Above 2 s, taps and scrolls feel sluggish.

7 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 638 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.

6 third-party services load with your homepage (Adobe Tag Manager, cleverpush.com and storifyme.com and others), adding 453 KiB and 236 ms of main-thread time.

Web fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).

38 KiB JavaScript is shipped twice across bundles.

Polyfills for old browsers add 38 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.

About 26 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.

Desktop scores 57 but mobile only 20. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.

1 image could be 8 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen.

Critical files load one after another instead of in parallel (3 chains). Preconnecting to key origins and preloading the hero image shortens the chain.

Scripts make the browser recalculate the layout repeatedly while the page loads, which wastes processor time on phones.

Real Chrome users on phones do not pass Google's Core Web Vitals on this page (28-day field data from the Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab)). Google uses this in ranking.

Real visitors wait 543 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

The first text or image appears after 9.5 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

Your largest element takes 16.6 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the image “Nennt seine Anhänger eine „Armee der Würde und Demokratie“:…”.

The page becomes fully interactive after 17.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

Visually, the page fills in at 10.8 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

The layout shifts by 0.671 while loading, so content jumps under the reader's thumb. Good is under 0.1.

Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 215 ms to 262 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

Scripts block taps and scrolling for 499 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.

Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-24, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.6 s to 1.5 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

Your homepage downloads 3.0 MB in 236 requests on a phone: scripts 1.5 MB (145), fonts 816 KiB (14) and images 296 KiB (13). Under 2 MB keeps phones on slow connections fast.

By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.86 g of CO₂e: 103.2 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

1 button has no accessible name, so screen readers announce just “button”.

10 tap targets are too small or too close together to hit reliably with a finger.

Interactive controls must not be nested: 4 elements on the page fail this check, rated serious by axe-core.

37 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.

3 form fields have no label, so screen readers announce an empty box and autofill guesses.

ARIA role should be appropriate for the element: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.

Headings skip levels (h1 → h3), which makes the page harder to scan with a screen reader.

No XML sitemap at https://www.faz.net/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.

17 links have no real href, so search engines can't follow them.

The homepage links to 297 pages on faz.net and 88 external pages.

Your robots.txt shuts out ChatGPT search (OAI-SearchBot), ChatGPT (ChatGPT-User), Claude search (Claude-SearchBot), Claude (Claude-User) and Perplexity (PerplexityBot). These fetch pages to answer people's questions and cite the source, so your site can't be quoted or linked in those answers.

There is no Organization (or LocalBusiness) JSON-LD, so search engines and AI assistants have no machine-readable facts about who runs the site: its name, logo, profiles and contact details.

There is no /llms.txt, a short Markdown guide to your key pages for AI tools (llmstxt.org). It is optional and few AI tools read it yet, so treat it as a cheap extra.

robots.txt blocks GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended, Applebot-Extended and CCBot, which collect pages to train models. That's a legitimate choice and doesn't by itself stop the site appearing in AI answers.

/aktuell/das-beste-von-faz-plus and /aktuell/politik/geschichte all use the title “Menü schließen”. Search engines can't tell which page to show for a search, so each competes with the others.

/suche, /aktuell/das-beste-von-faz-plus, /aktuell/politik/geschichte and /aktuell/wirtschaft/auto-verkehr have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.

We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 198 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

14 of 24 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.

1 error was logged to the browser console while the page loaded, for example “avenga.snacks.init is not a function”.

HSTS is set, but max-age is 180 days; one year is the recommended minimum.

Opening https://faz.net goes through 2 redirects before the homepage loads.

2 links go through two or more redirects, for example https://musterdepot.faz.net/.

There is no /.well-known/security.txt telling researchers how to report a security problem to you.

faz.net has no CAA record, so any certificate authority may issue a certificate for it. A CAA record naming your provider (for example letsencrypt.org) closes that door.

faz.net's DNS answers are not signed. DNSSEC stops attackers forging them to send visitors or email elsewhere; most registrars switch it on in a click, though most sites still run without it.

On a phone, there is no call to action on the first screen: visitors have to scroll to find out what to do next.

We found no call-to-action buttons or links (such as “Book a demo” or “Get a quote”) anywhere on the homepage.

Social proof on the homepage: 2 trust badges. Pairing it with named testimonials or customer logos makes it far more convincing.

No analytics or tag manager detected in the HTML, so you can't measure whether any of these fixes work.

No phone number or email link on the homepage, so ready-to-buy visitors have one fewer way to reach you.

No guarantee or risk reducer (money-back, free trial, no credit card) is mentioned, which is often what tips a hesitant visitor.

The homepage carries about 4,260 words of visible text.

faz.net has no DMARC record, so nothing tells receivers what to do with mail that fails SPF or DKIM. Gmail and Yahoo require DMARC from bulk senders.

We found no DKIM key on the selectors the big email providers use. If you send through one of them, turning on DKIM signing improves delivery.

Email authentication: SPF record 25 points, plus 15 when it ends in -all (10 for ~all); DMARC record 25, plus 25 for a reject policy (15 for quarantine); a DKIM key on a common selector 10.

Opening the homepage sets 1 cookie (measured from a US location before any click).

No known cookie consent tool loads with the page. Some sites build their own banner, and some only show one to visitors from the EU.

Loading the homepage contacts 8 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.