Programmable

Website review, no card needed

on.com logo

on.com website review

Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 12 October 202623 issues · 72 checks

This review found 23 issues worth fixing on on.com, 7 of them high impact, across 72 checks. The most urgent: render-blocking requests. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.

  1. Homepage
  2. Phone render
  3. Links and pages
  4. Google PageSpeed

Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile

Site score

80B

Closest competitors among reviewed websites

Compare side by side
Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
4.3 s3.8 sApr 18Oct 34.1 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
Apr 18, 20264.2 s
Apr 25, 20264.1 s
May 2, 20264.2 s
May 9, 20264.2 s
May 16, 20264.2 s
May 23, 20264.1 s
May 30, 20264.0 s
Jun 6, 20263.9 s
Jun 13, 20264.0 s
Jun 20, 20264.1 s
Jun 27, 20264.2 s
Jul 4, 20264.2 s
Jul 11, 20264.2 s
Jul 18, 20264.2 s
Jul 25, 20264.1 s
Aug 1, 20264.1 s
Aug 8, 20264.0 s
Aug 15, 20263.9 s
Aug 22, 20263.9 s
Aug 29, 20264.0 s
Sep 5, 20264.0 s
Sep 12, 20264.1 s
Sep 19, 20264.2 s
Sep 26, 20264.2 s
Oct 3, 20264.1 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
382 ms294 msApr 18Oct 3372 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
Apr 18, 2026345 ms
Apr 25, 2026343 ms
May 2, 2026337 ms
May 9, 2026328 ms
May 16, 2026316 ms
May 23, 2026310 ms
May 30, 2026305 ms
Jun 6, 2026304 ms
Jun 13, 2026312 ms
Jun 20, 2026319 ms
Jun 27, 2026323 ms
Jul 4, 2026326 ms
Jul 11, 2026323 ms
Jul 18, 2026328 ms
Jul 25, 2026330 ms
Aug 1, 2026333 ms
Aug 8, 2026334 ms
Aug 15, 2026332 ms
Aug 22, 2026335 ms
Aug 29, 2026337 ms
Sep 5, 2026339 ms
Sep 12, 2026343 ms
Sep 19, 2026357 ms
Sep 26, 2026368 ms
Oct 3, 2026372 ms

Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab): real Chrome visitors over rolling 28-day periods.

One score from every part of this review. How it works

www.on.com (opens in a new tab)
Full-page screenshot of on.com (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

  1. on.com at 0.4 s0.4 s
  2. on.com at 0.8 s0.8 s
  3. on.com at 1.1 s1.1 s
  4. on.com at 1.5 s1.5 s
  5. on.com at 1.9 s1.9 s
  6. on.com at 2.3 s2.3 s
  7. on.com at 2.6 s2.6 s
  8. on.com at 3.0 s3.0 s

Speed

6 to fix71

  • Render-blocking requests

    1.9 s

    42 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 1.9 s.

  • Improve image delivery

    900 ms · 611 KiB

    18 images could be 611 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 900 ms faster on a phone.

  • Mobile performance score: 71

    71/100

    Your mobile performance score is 71 (desktop: 97). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • 1,766 HTML elements

    The page has 1,766 HTML elements. Above 1,500, rendering and every interaction get slower on phones.

  • 3 third-party services on the page

    3 third-party services load with your homepage (Cloudflare, ctfassets.net and on-running.com), adding 1.7 MB and 7 ms of main-thread time.

  • ctfassets.net adds 0 ms

    0 ms

    ctfassets.net costs a phone 0 ms of main-thread work and 1.5 MB of downloads while your page loads. Loading it after the page is usable, or only on the pages that need it, takes that off the critical path.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    11 KiB

    Polyfills for old browsers add 11 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.

  • Phones get a much slower page than desktops

    Desktop scores 97 but mobile only 71. A gap that wide usually means heavy scripts and images that hit phones hardest.

  • Chained critical requests

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

  • Use efficient cache lifetimes

    4 KiB

    1 file is served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (4 KiB).

2 checks passed

  • Main-thread work: 0.5 s

    A phone's processor spends 0.5 s on main-thread work while loading, 18 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.

  • Server response: 27 ms

    27 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 27 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

9 to fix33

  • Fails Core Web Vitals for real visitors

    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-user CLS: 0.78

    0.78

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.78 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • First Contentful Paint: 3.9 s

    3.9 s

    The first text or image appears after 3.9 s on a phone. Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 5.0 s

    5.0 s

    Your largest element takes 5.0 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Performance-grade gear.”. Most of its time is element render delay (2.4 s).

  • Real-user INP: 295 ms

    295 ms

    Real visitors wait 295 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user FCP: 2.0 s

    2.0 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 2.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 1.4 s

    1.4 s

    Real visitors wait 1.4 s for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.

  • Speed Index: 5.0 s

    5.0 s

    Visually, the page fills in at 5.0 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.

  • Time to Interactive: 5.0 s

    5.0 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 5.0 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Tap response (INP) held steady for real visitors

    +8%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 345 ms to 372 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

  • Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors

    0%

    Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 4.2 s to 4.1 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).

3 checks passed

  • Real-user LCP: 2.1 s

    2.1 s

    Real visitors wait 2.1 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0

    0

    The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).

  • Total Blocking Time: 0 ms

    0 ms

    Scripts block the page for only 0 ms while loading. Good is under 200 ms.

Images and page weight

100

  • 2 images below the first screen load straight away

    2 images further down the page (48 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to them. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.

  • About 0.5 g of CO₂ per visit

    0.53 g

    By the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.53 g of CO₂e: 63.6 kg a year at 10,000 visits a month. It scales with page weight, so every byte cut lowers it.

3 checks passed

  • Page weight: 1.9 MB in 92 requests

    1.9 MB

    Your homepage downloads 1.9 MB in 92 requests on a phone: images 1.5 MB (44), fonts 166 KiB (3) and HTML 129 KiB (1). That is a lean page.

  • Images use modern formats

    Every sizeable image is WebP, AVIF or SVG.

  • Images are sized for phones

    No image is downloaded at more than three times the size it is drawn on a phone.

Accessibility

1 to fixGoogle 10099

  • Headings should not be empty (1 element)

    Headings should not be empty: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated minor by axe-core.

  • Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names.

    Elements with visible text labels do not have matching accessible names. (1 element).

2 checks passed

  • Every image has alt text

    All 40 images in the HTML carry an alt attribute.

  • 44 automated accessibility rules passed

    axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 45 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 44 passed and 1 failed. 1 more need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.

SEO

1 to fixGoogle 10097

  • No social preview image

    No Open Graph image, so links shared on LinkedIn, Slack or Facebook show no preview picture.

  • No X (Twitter) card tag

    No twitter:card tag. X falls back to Open Graph, which is incomplete here.

  • 58 internal links, 18 external

    The homepage links to 58 pages on on.com and 18 external pages.

7 checks passed

  • Meta description: 148 characters

    Your meta description is 148 characters: “Born in the Swiss Alps, On running shoes feature the first patented cushioning system which is activated only when you …”.

  • One H1 headline

    Your main headline reads: “Performance-grade gear.”.

  • Title: 47 characters

    Your title is a healthy 47 characters: “On | Swiss Performance Running Shoes & Clothing”.

  • Canonical URL set

    The canonical URL is https://www.on.com/en-us/.

  • Structured data in place

    Structured data found: WebSite.

  • robots.txt in place

    robots.txt is in place.

  • XML sitemap found

    Your XML sitemap is reachable at https://www.on.com/sitemap.xml.

AI search readiness

1 to fix88

  • No Organization structured data

    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.

3 checks passed

  • AI answer engines may read the site

    Your robots.txt lets the crawlers behind ChatGPT search, Claude and Perplexity read the site and cite it in answers.

  • Text is in the HTML

    Your server sends the page's text in the HTML (360 words), so crawlers that don't run JavaScript still read it.

  • llms.txt published

    The site publishes https://www.on.com/llms.txt (1 KiB, 5 links), a plain-text guide to the site for AI tools.

Other pages

3 to fix75

  • 14 pages without a title

    https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/mens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/womens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/shoes, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/apparel, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/accessories and https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/running and 8 others have no <title>, so Google invents the link text in results.

  • 14 pages without a meta description

    https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/mens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/womens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/shoes, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/apparel, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/accessories and https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/running and 8 others have no meta description, so Google writes the search snippet from whatever text it finds.

  • 14 pages without an H1

    https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/mens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/womens/training, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/shoes, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/apparel, https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/accessories and https://www.on.com/en-us/shop/running and 8 others have no <h1> headline, so visitors and search engines get no clear main topic.

  • 15 internal pages checked

    We fetched 15 pages linked from your homepage (of 40 found) and read each the way a search engine does.

4 checks passed

  • Linked pages load

    All 15 pages we checked loaded without an error.

  • Canonical URLs point to themselves

    No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.

  • Titles are unique

    Every page we checked has its own title.

  • No linked page is hidden from search

    None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.

Best practices

Google 100100
3 checks passed

  • No console errors

    No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.

  • Tap targets are thumb-sized

    29 of 30 tappable elements near the top are at least 24 px.

  • Mobile viewport set

    The page declares a mobile viewport.

Content and conversion

2 to fix75

  • No social proof

    No testimonials, customer logos, ratings or customer counts on the homepage: nothing tells a new visitor that others already trust you.

  • No direct contact details

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

  • No risk reducer

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

  • About 300 words of copy

    The homepage carries about 300 words of visible text.

4 checks passed

  • Clear next step on the first screen

    On a phone, the first screen shows a clear next step: “Shop men's” and “Shop women's”.

  • 5 calls to action

    The homepage has 5 calls to action, for example “Shop men's”, “Shop women's” and “Try Again”.

  • 1 short form

    A short form (1 field at most) is right on the homepage, asking for an email.

  • Analytics in place

    Analytics detected: Microsoft Clarity and Cloudflare Web Analytics.

Privacy and tracking

  • 15 cookies set on arrival

    15

    Opening the homepage sets 15 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).

  • 5 other companies contacted

    Loading the homepage contacts 5 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.

2 checks passed

  • Consent tool: OneTrust

    A consent management tool (OneTrust) loads with the page.

  • No known trackers before consent

    No known advertising or analytics trackers load before a visitor clicks anything (measured from a US location before any click).

Security, domain, email and software versions

The security, domain and email checks, software and plugin versions, and any app with a known security problem are visible only to people at on.com, because details like these could help someone attack a site. Every review keeps them private, whatever they found.

Go beyond the website

What your $25 Growth Playbook adds

This review found 23 issues on on.com, including 15 speed issues, 1 SEO issue and 2 conversion gaps. That is the website alone. The full Growth Playbook pairs these findings with what your customers say in public reviews and communities and what your closest competitors do better, then turns everything into at least 20 prioritised ideas, each with the evidence behind it, a step-by-step playbook, a metric and an owner.

  • 28 research agents read your site, reviews, competitors, communities and public filings
  • Customer review mining (G2, Capterra, Trustpilot and more) and voice-of-pain analysis in your buyers’ own words
  • Competitor intelligence with battlecards for your closest rivals
  • Ideal customer profile, buyer segments and buying-stage funnel
  • Ranked channels, outreach sequences and content angles
  • Live Reddit threads where buyers ask for what you sell, with draft replies
  • Earned media and PR openings
  • At least 20 ideas with evidence, a step-by-step playbook, metric, owner, effort and impact, grouped into this week, this quarter, big bets and wildcards, plus a 30/60/90-day roadmap
  • PDF, Markdown, CSV, Notion and Linear exports, and a shareable page your team can track progress on
  • Refresh the playbook later to see what changed

By continuing you agree to the Terms and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.

Free requests are written in the order they come in, so it can take a while. Pay $25 and yours is ready within a few hours. Either way you get a shareable link and a PDF.

  • No subscription
  • Free, or $25 to skip the line
  • Money-back guarantee

14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.

Get the full playbook · $25