The State of Web Vitals

Scripts per page

How many scripts the page runs and their over-the-wire weight.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites Q2 2026 edition · Desktop field outcomes
Metric LCP INP CLS
1

At a glance the headline numbers for Scripts per page

How many scripts the page runs and their over-the-wire weight.

26
script count
on the typical page
552 KB
script weight
on the typical page
1,006 KB
1 in 4 pages exceed this
script weight
180,684
sites measured
desktop field data

The typical page runs 26 scripts weighing 552 KB.

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

Distribution & median INP site count and median INP at each level of scripts per page — n

0ms 63ms 125ms 188ms 250ms
200ms
0 17736 35472
0 1–2 3 4 5–7 8–11 12–18 19–30 31–48 49–78 79–126 >p98
Good (≤200ms) Needs improvement Poor (>500ms) Site count
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing INP by scripts per page — n which level passes the INP most often

Scripts per page — nSitesPassing INPINP
0 3,961 98% 44ms
1–2 4,652 97% 50ms
3 2,889 98% 49ms
4 3,345 99% 46ms
5–7 10,175 99% 45ms
8–11 14,846 99% 45ms
12–18 26,268 99% 46ms
19–30 35,472 99% 47ms
31–48 33,797 99% 49ms
49–78 26,704 99% 52ms
79–126 15,132 99% 59ms
>p98 3,443 98% 65ms
Good Needs Improvement Poor Faded rows: under 100 sites

Scripts per page — n 26. p75 49. p99 156. At the low end (0): INP 44ms. At the high end (>p98): INP 65ms. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

Distribution & median INP site count and median INP at each level of scripts per page — size

0ms 63ms 125ms 188ms 250ms
200ms
0 35564 71127
0 0.1–0.28 0.28–0.784 0.784–2.2 2.2–6.15 6.15–17.2 17.2–48.2 48.2–135 135–378 378–1060 1060–2968 >p98
Good (≤200ms) Needs improvement Poor (>500ms) Site count
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
5

Passing INP by scripts per page — size which level passes the INP most often

Scripts per page — sizeSitesPassing INPINP
0 763 98% 50ms
0.28–0.784 147 100% 37ms
0.784–2.2 326 99% 36ms
2.2–6.15 571 97% 47ms
6.15–17.2 1,505 99% 46ms
17.2–48.2 3,496 99% 40ms
48.2–135 15,226 100% 39ms
135–378 42,449 99% 44ms
378–1060 71,127 99% 48ms
1060–2968 36,960 98% 59ms
>p98 3,507 95% 72ms
Good Needs Improvement Poor Faded rows: under 100 sites

Scripts per page — size 552 KB. p75 1,006 KB. p99 3.7 MB. Spearman with INP r = +0.37. At the low end (0 KB): INP 50ms. At the high end (>p98): INP 72ms. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
6

Why this matters for the Core Web Vitals, and where to start fixing it

Script weight is the most expensive weight. A kilobyte of JavaScript costs more than a kilobyte of image, because after the download it is parsed, compiled and executed on the main thread. That is the same thread that must answer every click and keystroke, which is why script totals track INP.

The count matters next to the bytes: every script is a potential long task and another spot for the main thread to stall. Most pages would lose nothing by deferring most of their scripts. The ones that truly must run early are rare.

How do scripts affect the Core Web Vitals?

Passing INP barely moves across the range: 98% at one end, 95% at the other. This signal does not separate passing sites from failing ones.

Go fix it 14 methods to defer JavaScript → Reduce unused JavaScript → JavaScript priority levels →
Related signals DOM size → Page weight & requests → Image source mix → Stylesheet loading mix → Chrome field data from 189,915 sites, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured