I've been doing a good bit of research into website performance lately and I'd say I've gained a fair amount of knowledge about best practises to improve website performance as well as reduce bandwidth requirements by making such tweaks as GZipping, content caching, and image and script optimization.

My problem is I've found plenty of case studies from hugely popular sites such as Facebook, Google and Amazon but what I really want is some findings and figures for sites a bit smaller say 50-250k visitors a month.

I'm looking for what was gained from investing time into performance optimization e.g. significant speed improvements, reduced bounce rate, reduced running costs, and all the analytics stuff.

  • 1
    Why are you asking about smaller sites when the exact same principles apply? A well optimized web site is a good thing regardless of size. The only difference is that as sites grow larger these issues become more critical because they translate directly into money savings. 5% of a $1M per month site is big savings. 5% of a $100 per month site isn't all that much. Jul 13, 2010 at 9:28

2 Answers 2


It all varies between implementations, but for smaller sites it might be good to spend the initial 10% (that often gives the large percentage performance gains) but not necessarily the nitty gritty tweaking.

A small site should have good performance in those numbers even without optimization. After that when you grows over time you can look into optimizing the parts that are lagging behind.



What is the load speed now? If its under 2 seconds, let it go. If not you need to fix it. It may be a big factor in you SERPs as well. Google says that a 1/2 second delay means a 20% loss of traffic. Some sites can double their traffic by fixing page speed. It just depends how bad it is to start with.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .