Website review, no card needed

ratemyprofessors.com logo

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.

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

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

Real-visitor load time (LCP)75th percentile, phones
1.5 s1.2 sApr 18Oct 31.4 s
Show as table
DateReal-visitor load time (LCP)
Apr 18, 20261.3 s
Apr 25, 20261.3 s
May 2, 20261.3 s
May 9, 20261.3 s
May 16, 20261.3 s
May 23, 20261.3 s
May 30, 20261.3 s
Jun 6, 20261.4 s
Jun 13, 20261.4 s
Jun 20, 20261.4 s
Jun 27, 20261.4 s
Jul 4, 20261.5 s
Jul 11, 20261.5 s
Jul 18, 20261.5 s
Jul 25, 20261.5 s
Aug 1, 20261.5 s
Aug 8, 20261.5 s
Aug 15, 20261.4 s
Aug 22, 20261.4 s
Aug 29, 20261.4 s
Sep 5, 20261.4 s
Sep 12, 20261.4 s
Sep 19, 20261.4 s
Sep 26, 20261.4 s
Oct 3, 20261.4 s
Real-visitor tap response (INP)75th percentile, phones
268 ms207 msApr 18Oct 3214 ms
Show as table
DateReal-visitor tap response (INP)
Apr 18, 2026261 ms
Apr 25, 2026258 ms
May 2, 2026253 ms
May 9, 2026246 ms
May 16, 2026245 ms
May 23, 2026247 ms
May 30, 2026248 ms
Jun 6, 2026250 ms
Jun 13, 2026246 ms
Jun 20, 2026240 ms
Jun 27, 2026237 ms
Jul 4, 2026231 ms
Jul 11, 2026230 ms
Jul 18, 2026229 ms
Jul 25, 2026228 ms
Aug 1, 2026232 ms
Aug 8, 2026237 ms
Aug 15, 2026241 ms
Aug 22, 2026245 ms
Aug 29, 2026249 ms
Sep 5, 2026246 ms
Sep 12, 2026238 ms
Sep 19, 2026230 ms
Sep 26, 2026221 ms
Oct 3, 2026214 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

Full-page screenshot of ratemyprofessors.com (desktop) rendered by Google PageSpeed Insights

How it loaded on a phone

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

Speed

6 to fix65
  • Reduce unused JavaScript

    2.1 s · 395 KiB

    About 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

    65/100

    Your mobile performance score is 65 (desktop: 55). Pages that score under 90 lose visitors before the first paint.

  • Render-blocking requests

    750 ms

    3 files block the first paint until they finish downloading. Deferring or inlining them could save about 750 ms.

  • Improve image delivery

    550 ms · 94 KiB

    1 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 KiB

    6 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 ms

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

  • Reduce unused CSS

    19 KiB

    About 19 KiB of CSS is downloaded but never applied on this page.

  • Legacy JavaScript

    9 KiB

    Polyfills 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 ms

    Your server sent the HTML in 3 ms, well inside Google's 600 ms guideline.

Core Web Vitals

7 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.

  • Largest Contentful Paint: 9.2 s

    9.2 s

    Your 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 s

    The page becomes fully interactive after 9.2 s. Good is under 3.8 s.

  • Real-user INP: 237 ms

    237 ms

    Real visitors wait 237 ms for the page to respond to a tap (75th percentile). Good is under 200 ms.

  • Real-user CLS: 0.18

    0.18

    For real visitors the layout shifts by 0.18 (75th percentile). Good is under 0.1.

  • Total Blocking Time: 360 ms

    360 ms

    Scripts 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 s

    Visually, 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 s

    Real 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 s

    Real visitors see the first content after 1.0 s (75th percentile). Good is under 1.8 s.

  • Real-user TTFB: 472 ms

    472 ms

    Real 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 s

    The first text or image appears after 1.7 s, inside the 1.8 s “good” threshold.

  • Cumulative Layout Shift: 0

    0

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

Images and page weight

100
  • 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 g

    By 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 MB

    Your 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

8 to fixGoogle 8785
  • 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

8 to fixGoogle 8357
  • 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

2 to fix37
  • robots.txt blocks 6 AI answer engine crawlers

    6 of 6

    Your 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

1 to fix98
  • 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

2 to fixGoogle 9689
  • 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

4 to fix50
  • 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

    8

    Before 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

    16

    Opening 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

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