Target Core Web Vitals
How real Chrome users experience www.target.com, from Google's Chrome UX Report: the 75th percentile of visits on every device.
Target fails Core Web Vitals
Sep 27 – Oct 24, all devices
INP
197 ms
Good
LCP
2.7 s
Needs improvement
CLS
0.29
Poor
FCP
1.6 s
Good
TTFB
1.1 s
Needs improvement
INP over time
Weekly p75. The dashed line is the 200 ms "good" threshold.
What the numbers say
- Target fails Core Web Vitals on Largest Contentful Paint (2.7 s, good is 2.5 s or less) and Cumulative Layout Shift (0.29, good is 0.10 or less).
- The server answers slowly: time to first byte is 1.1 s, 42% of the LCP time, so a faster backend or cache would help most.
- Among 11 e-commerce sites we track, Target has the 10th fastest LCP.
- INP has worsened by 18 ms over the last 24 weeks, from 179 ms to 197 ms.
Keep a site like this from getting slower
Real-user data shows a regression weeks after it ships. Vitalgate runs Lighthouse on every pull request and fails the check when a change breaks budgets like these: LCP ≤ 2.8 s, CLS ≤ 0.29, FCP ≤ 1.8 s.
Other e-commerce sites
| Site | Core Web Vitals | LCP | INP | CLS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amazon | Fails | 1.7 s | 160 ms | 0.13 |
| eBay | Passes | 2.0 s | 153 ms | 0.03 |
| Etsy | Passes | 2.1 s | 131 ms | 0.00 |
| Walmart | Fails | 2.8 s | 159 ms | 0.06 |
| Best Buy | Fails | 2.6 s | 162 ms | 0.12 |
| Nike | Passes | 2.3 s | 173 ms | 0.07 |
| IKEA | Passes | 1.2 s | 112 ms | 0.04 |
| AliExpress | Passes | 2.1 s | 128 ms | 0.10 |
| Mercado Libre | Passes | 1.8 s | 139 ms | 0.00 |
| Apple | Fails | 2.7 s | 118 ms | 0.08 |