Website review, no card needed
ratemyprofessors.com website review
Visit site (opens in a new tab)Reviewed 12 October 202638 issues · 81 checks
This review found 38 issues worth fixing on ratemyprofessors.com, 12 of them high impact, across 81 checks. The most urgent: reduce unused JavaScript. Your full playbook turns these into prioritised fixes alongside reviews, competitors and channels.
- Homepage
- Phone render
- Links and pages
- Google PageSpeed
Google PageSpeed Insights (opens in a new tab), mobile
Site score
67DClosest competitors among reviewed websites
Compare side by sideShow as table
| Date | Real-visitor load time (LCP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Apr 25, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 2, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 9, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 16, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 23, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| May 30, 2026 | 1.3 s |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 1.5 s |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 1.4 s |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 1.4 s |
Show as table
| Date | Real-visitor tap response (INP) |
|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2026 | 261 ms |
| Apr 25, 2026 | 258 ms |
| May 2, 2026 | 253 ms |
| May 9, 2026 | 246 ms |
| May 16, 2026 | 245 ms |
| May 23, 2026 | 247 ms |
| May 30, 2026 | 248 ms |
| Jun 6, 2026 | 250 ms |
| Jun 13, 2026 | 246 ms |
| Jun 20, 2026 | 240 ms |
| Jun 27, 2026 | 237 ms |
| Jul 4, 2026 | 231 ms |
| Jul 11, 2026 | 230 ms |
| Jul 18, 2026 | 229 ms |
| Jul 25, 2026 | 228 ms |
| Aug 1, 2026 | 232 ms |
| Aug 8, 2026 | 237 ms |
| Aug 15, 2026 | 241 ms |
| Aug 22, 2026 | 245 ms |
| Aug 29, 2026 | 249 ms |
| Sep 5, 2026 | 246 ms |
| Sep 12, 2026 | 238 ms |
| Sep 19, 2026 | 230 ms |
| Sep 26, 2026 | 221 ms |
| Oct 3, 2026 | 214 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
How it loaded on a phone
0.4 s
0.8 s
1.1 s
1.5 s
1.9 s
2.3 s
2.6 s
3.0 s
Speed
Reduce unused JavaScript
2.1 s · 395 KiBAbout 395 KiB of JavaScript is downloaded but never used on this page. Google estimates it would make the page about 2.1 s faster on a phone.
Mobile performance score: 65
65/100Your mobile performance score is 65 (desktop: 55). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.
Render-blocking requests
750 ms3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 750 ms.
Improve image delivery
550 ms · 94 KiB1 image could be 94 KiB smaller with modern formats (WebP or AVIF) and sizes that fit a phone screen. Google estimates it would make the page about 550 ms faster on a phone.
Use efficient cache lifetimes
350 ms · 71 KiB6 files are served with short cache lifetimes, so returning visitors download them again (71 KiB).
4 long tasks on the main thread
4 long tasks block the main thread while loading, the longest for 405 ms. During a long task the page ignores taps.
3 third-party services on the page
3 third-party services load with your homepage (Optanon, Help Scout and cloudfront.net), adding 297 KiB and 144 ms of main-thread time.
Font display
100 msWeb fonts hide text while they load. Setting font-display: swap shows text immediately (about 100 ms).
Reduce unused CSS
19 KiBAbout 19 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.
Legacy JavaScript
9 KiBPolyfills for old browsers add 9 KiB JavaScript that modern phones do not need.
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.
2 checks passed
Main-thread work: 1.0 s
A phone's processor spends 1.0 s on main-thread work while loading, 593 ms of it running JavaScript. That is comfortably low.
Server response: 3 ms
3 msYour server sent the HTML in 3 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.
Core Web Vitals
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.
Largest Contentful Paint: 9.2 s
9.2 sYour largest element takes 9.2 s to render on a phone. Google's threshold for “good” is 2.5 s. The largest element is the text “Enter your school to get started I'd like to look up a prof…”.
Time to Interactive: 9.2 s
9.2 sThe page becomes fully interactive after 9.2 s. Good is under 3.8 s.
Real-user INP: 237 ms
237 msReal visitors wait 237 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.
Real-user CLS: 0.18
0.18For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.18 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.
Total Blocking Time: 360 ms
360 msScripts block taps and scrolling for 360 ms in total while the page loads. Good is under 200 ms.
Speed Index: 3.5 s
3.5 sVisually, the page fills in at 3.5 s (Speed Index). Good is under 3.4 s.
Largest content (LCP) held steady for real visitors
+9%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' largest content (lcp) went from 1.3 s to 1.4 s at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
6 checks passed
Real-user LCP: 1.4 s
1.4 sReal visitors wait 1.4 s for the largest content to appear (75th percentile). Good is under 2.5 s.
Real-user FCP: 1.0 s
1.0 sReal visitors see the first content after 1.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.
Real-user TTFB: 472 ms
472 msReal visitors wait 472 ms for your server to start answering (75th percentile). Good is under 800 ms.
Tap response (INP) got 16% faster for real visitors
-16%Over the last 25 four-week periods to 2026-10-03, real Chrome visitors' tap response (inp) went from 261 ms to 214 ms at the 75th percentile (Chrome UX Report (opens in a new tab) history).
First Contentful Paint: 1.7 s
1.7 sThe first text or image appears after 1.7 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.
Cumulative Layout Shift: 0
0The layout barely moves while loading (CLS 0, good is under 0.1).
Images and page weight
1 image below the first screen load straight away
1 image further down the page (28 KiB) download before anyone scrolls to it. Adding loading="lazy" lets the first screen load first.
About 0.4 g of CO₂ per visit
0.43 gBy the Sustainable Web Design model, a visit to your homepage emits about 0.43 g of CO₂e: 51.9 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: 1.5 MB in 33 requests
1.5 MBYour homepage downloads 1.5 MB in 33 requests on a phone: scripts 812 KiB (7), images 627 KiB (11) and other files 84 KiB (10). 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 text element with low contrast
1 text element doesn't have enough contrast against the background to read easily, especially outdoors on a phone.
<html> element must have a lang attribute (1 element)
<html> element must have a lang attribute: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated serious by axe-core.
2 images without alt text
2 images have no alt text, which hurts accessibility and image search.
All page content should be contained by landmarks (9 elements)
All page content should be contained by landmarks: 9 elements on the page fail this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
No main landmark
The page has no <main> landmark, so screen-reader users cannot jump straight to the content.
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination (1 element)
Landmarks should have a unique role or role/label/title (i.e. accessible name) combination: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
Page should contain a level-one heading (1 element)
Page should contain a level-one heading: 1 element on the page fails this check, rated moderate by axe-core.
No page language
The <html> element has no lang attribute, so screen readers may read the page in the wrong voice and accent.
1 checks passed
29 automated accessibility rules passed
axe-core 4.13.0, the open-source engine behind most accessibility testing tools, ran 36 WCAG 2.2 A/AA and best-practice rules on the phone render: 29 passed and 7 failed. 2 mores need a person to judge. Automated rules catch about a third of accessibility problems; the rest need manual testing.
SEO
robots.txt blocks all crawlers
Your robots.txt disallows the whole site for every crawler, so search engines are told to stay out.
No H1 headline
There is no <h1>, so neither visitors nor Google get a clear main headline.
Title is short (18 characters)
Your title is only 18 characters: “Rate My Professors”. Between 30 and 65 characters leaves room to say what you do and for whom.
No structured data
No structured data (JSON-LD), so Google can't show rich results such as your logo, ratings or FAQs.
Meta description is short (38 characters)
Your meta description is only 38 characters: “Find and rate your professor or school”. 70 to 160 characters is enough to sell the click.
No canonical URL
No canonical URL, so duplicate versions of the homepage (with or without www, with tracking parameters) can split ranking signals.
No XML sitemap
No XML sitemap at https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/sitemap.xml, so Google discovers your pages only by following links.
1 link with vague text
1 link use generic text like “click here” or “learn more”, which tells Google nothing about the page behind it.
6 internal links, 1 external
The homepage links to 6 pages on ratemyprofessors.com and 1 external page.
1 checks passed
Open Graph tags complete
Open Graph tags are complete, so shared links show a title, description and image.
AI search readiness
robots.txt blocks 6 AI answer engine crawlers
6 of 6Your robots.txt shuts out ChatGPT search (OAI-SearchBot), ChatGPT (ChatGPT-User), Claude search (Claude-SearchBot), Claude (Claude-User), Perplexity (PerplexityBot) and Perplexity (Perplexity-User). These fetch pages to answer people's questions and cite the source, so your site can't be quoted or linked in those answers.
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.
No llms.txt
There is no https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/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.
Opted out of AI training for 5 crawlers
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.
Other pages
4 pages share a meta description
https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/guidelines, https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/terms-of-use, https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/privacy and https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/copyright use the same meta description. A description written for each page earns more clicks.
4 internal pages checked
We fetched 4 pages linked from your homepage and read each the way a search engine does.
7 checks passed
Linked pages load
All 4 pages we checked loaded without an error.
Canonical URLs point to themselves
No page we checked hands its ranking to a different URL.
Every page has a meta description
All 4 pages that loaded have a meta description.
Titles are unique
Every page we checked has its own title.
Every page has an H1
Each page we checked has a main headline.
No linked page is hidden from search
None of the pages we checked carries a noindex tag.
Every page has a title
All 4 pages that loaded have a <title>.
Best practices
4 small tap targets
4 of 5 tappable elements near the top of the page are smaller than 24 px, hard to hit with a thumb.
No HTML doctype
The page has no <!DOCTYPE html>, so browsers render it in quirks mode.
Missing source maps
Large scripts ship without source maps.
2 checks passed
No console errors
No JavaScript errors were logged while the page loaded on a phone.
Mobile viewport set
The page declares a mobile viewport.
Content and conversion
No call to action on the first screen
On a phone, there is no call to action on the first screen: visitors have to scroll to find out what to do next.
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.
Only about 70 words
The homepage has only about 70 words of visible text; thin pages give Google and first-time buyers little to go on.
No form on the homepage
There is no form on the homepage, so every lead has to click through to another page first.
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.
2 checks passed
2 calls to action
The homepage has 2 calls to action, for example “Sign Up” and “Sign up now!”.
Analytics in place
Analytics detected: Google Tag Manager.
Privacy and tracking
8 trackers load before any consent
8Before a visitor clicks anything, the page loads Amazon Ads, Criteo, Google Ads, Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager and 3 mores (measured from a US location before any click). A consent tool (OneTrust) is installed; check it blocks these until visitors agree where the law requires it.
16 cookies set on arrival
16Opening the homepage sets 16 cookies (measured from a US location before any click).
43 other companies contacted
Loading the homepage contacts 43 hosts run by other companies (fonts, scripts, analytics, ads), each of which sees the visitor's IP address.
1 checks passed
Consent tool: OneTrust
A consent management tool (OneTrust) loads with the page.
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 ratemyprofessors.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 38 issues on ratemyprofessors.com, including 13 speed issues, 8 SEO issues and 4 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
14-day money-back guarantee: not happy for any reason, email us within 14 days and we refund in full.