Chat & messaging impact

Performance impact by chat provider.

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

At a glance the headline numbers for Chat & messaging impact

Performance impact by chat provider.

13
Providers ranked
After min-sites filter
5,104
Sites in sample
Combined across all items
65ms
Best INP (p75)
Smartsupp
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

The ranking sorted by INP at p75, fastest first

# Provider INP p75 Passing Sites
1 Smartsupp 65ms 100.0%
279
2 Tidio 71ms 99.5%
424
3 HubSpot Chat 73ms 98.9%
1,377
4 Zendesk Chat 74ms 98.4%
699
5 Crisp 77ms 98.7%
253
6 LiveChat 79ms 99.1%
333
7 Help Scout Beacon 81ms 100.0%
50
8 Intercom 89ms 98.4%
200
9 Re:amaze 95ms 100.0%
132
10 Gorgias 103ms 98.8%
214
11 Freshchat 108ms 92.5%
80
12 Tawk.to 122ms 97.2%
1,000
13 Chatwoot 160ms 93.8%
63
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing INP per provider which group passes the INP most often

ProviderSitesPassing INPp75
Front Chat 0% 12 100% 90ms
Re:amaze 0.1% 132 100% 95ms
Drift 0% 14 100% 48ms
Smartsupp 0.1% 279 100% 65ms
LiveAgent 0% 25 100% 61ms
Help Scout Beacon 0% 50 100% 81ms
Tidio 0.2% 424 100% 71ms
LiveChat 0.2% 333 99% 79ms
HubSpot Chat 0.7% 1,377 99% 73ms
Gorgias 0.1% 214 99% 103ms
Crisp 0.1% 253 99% 77ms
Zendesk Chat 0.4% 699 98% 74ms
Intercom 0.1% 200 98% 89ms
tawk.to 0.5% 1,000 97% 122ms
Chatwoot 0% 63 94% 160ms
Olark 0% 43 93% 68ms
Freshchat 0% 80 93% 108ms
Good Needs Improvement Poor Sorted best-passing first · median colored by its own rating · pass = good INP (200ms at p75) · one value per site

No provider stands out: pass rates sit between 97% and 100%. computed

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

All five vitals at once the whole category without toggling - cell is the pass rate, small number the p75

LCP
INP
CLS
FCP
TTFB
HubSpot Chat 0.7%
852.1s
9973ms
800.09
801.6s
601.2s
tawk.to 0.5%
812.2s
97122ms
720.11
751.8s
471.4s
Zendesk Chat 0.4%
842.1s
9874ms
760.10
811.6s
621.0s
Tidio 0.2%
772.4s
10071ms
730.11
731.9s
591.4s
LiveChat 0.2%
772.4s
9979ms
610.16
741.8s
531.3s
Smartsupp 0.1%
852.1s
10065ms
740.11
781.7s
461.3s
Crisp 0.1%
812.3s
9977ms
780.10
741.8s
531.3s
Gorgias 0.1%
912.1s
99103ms
780.09
921.3s
89534ms
Intercom 0.1%
792.4s
9889ms
760.10
811.5s
64986ms
Re:amaze 0.1%
901.8s
10095ms
840.09
941.2s
97505ms
Freshchat 0%
812.1s
93108ms
650.13
841.6s
74811ms
Chatwoot 0%
862.1s
94160ms
710.12
861.5s
61939ms
Help Scout Beacon 0%
931.8s
10081ms
730.11
881.4s
73858ms
Olark 0%
762.3s
9368ms
620.19
861.4s
59960ms
LiveAgent 0%
851.8s
10061ms
850.08
801.4s
55996ms
Drift 0%
1001.5s
10048ms
1000.02
1001.4s
291.0s
Front Chat 0%
822.2s
10090ms
730.11
641.9s
82673ms
60%95%+ passing Cell: pass rate, small number = p75 · faded rows: under 100 sites

One row per provider, one column per vital - the cell is the share of sites passing, the small number the p75. No toggling needed to see where the category actually differs.

Tidio leads on INP: 100% of its sites pass. tawk.to trails at 97%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
Related signals Customer data platforms (6) → Font services (4) → A/B testing (10) → RUM (13) → Chrome field data from 189,915 sites, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured