Core Web Vitals - Mobile (Fail)

When examining my Google Search Console under Experience, then Core Web Vitals, it is and has been since I transferred to the latest website package causing my website to be flagged poor on mobile due to “CLS issue: more than 0.25 (mobile)”. The website firmware I am on is Renaissance.

  • When inspecting Google Console, the data declares that the searched filters above the properties embed on the page is the culprit. You can see it when the page loads, the page itself moves around. I sent this to REW support 5-6 months ago. REW support told me that it is true, and they are looking into it.

Is there any process that you can share REW? Is anyone else experiencing this negative impact of SEO?

Link To My Website To Try. You can run a test on Page Speed Insights and you will see the failed test.

Thank you

1 Like

I have the exact same issue with my Renaissance site.

Only 30% of my URLs are considered “Good” in the core vitals section, with 70% “Failing”, because of the previously mentioned CLS issues with the Renaissance.

I asked questions about it when I launched and didn’t get an answer.

Hopefully, by you bringing it up here, they will look into it more thoroughly and explain what can be done about it.

1 Like

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for sharing your feedback. I expect REW is working on it. It would be fantastic to get an update.

1 Like

Hello John and Patrick,
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I would strongly recommend contacting your Account manager regarding this. Otherwise, if you’d like I can have them reach out to you!

I have already spoken to support and my account manager. There is nothing they can do about the fundamental coding of a REW Renaissance website.

My website has failed in this department ever since I converted to the new Renaissance website. It would be greatly appreciated to see some improvements.


Hello John and Patrick,

While WPO is a critical focus of our process in R & D as we develop and enhance Renaissance, it is a moving target. As such there may be times when new requirements or changes have been released that result in lighthouse throwing errors.

Also with respect to client modified sites (client content, code etc) those things are beyond our ability to control so you must take care to implement things in a WPO friendly manner should you wish to score high in web vitals.

There are also some pages (such as those with listings images that are third party sourced) that cannot be perfectly optimized.

With that being said - Renaissance (if you’re using it out of the box with no customizations) “should” give you an industry leading score (better than all your competitors)

I’ve just tested the out of the box install and I get the following:



Once you start adding / changing things though, that is where WPO gets tricky and it may require specific custom modifications to adjust your selected modules, snippets or content to score highly. It is an art and a science (and very finicky) but definitely something our pro serve team can help with.

Before speaking to your AM though - I would recommend making sure you check your site against your competitors: If your score is better than theirs, it is not always worth investing in / chasing green (often yellow 60-80 is market leading) and sometimes for specific features / value it’s worth giving up a few points.

We do value your feedback though, and if you have specific items that are related to the framework (and not your content) that you want to report to have shared to R & D, we are happy to look at it and see if we can’t increase speed in specific areas.

@JohnMiller I just checked your homepage, and I do agree that it’s score is quite low and while a full audit of your implemented features and content is beyond the scope of this forum (you need specialists for that) I can already see a few things:

For example: This embedded map:

This map is not an REW default feature, and appears to be sourcing third part (and external) .JS code

Any time you access third party code (in any way) you are risking your WPO and it is not recommended.

You also have this weather widget with a bunch of third party code:

I would honestly get rid of that weather app (And all externally sourced elements) on your site right away. They are not adding to your sites value in a meaningful way and are likely impacting it’s performance.

These are just a few of the places I would look first. But if you really want to try your hand at WPO testing. Try this: Save all your html (view source, save HTML) or copy all the elements in a folder)

then wipe the slate clean on your homepage (for example) test the framework with nothing added. Then add your elements back one by one and test, starting with properly optimized on page elements such as properly sized hero images, etc. This is a great way to at least identify the culprits and make decisions on whether having the element is worth the trade in performance.

One more (and then I have to head out)

Here you’re trying to get too fancy (and again looks like you’ve pulled in some third party code, and modified it) it looks ok, but definitely not ideal coding wise.

What you could have used instead is built in, inherent styles of Renaissance for a similar effect (which I actually think would have looked better) and then you would not be hurt so much on WPO.

Example (ignore little camera icons)

We’re actually working on a newer version of the style guide to help you use the “built in” styles more effectively by showing you additional examples.


We’ll share here when ready.

Definitely seeing those same results