Core Web Vitals

Which lens this is. The platform scoreboard: how static-site generators and hosting platforms compete on these numbers. The metrics themselves — definitions, thresholds, and the SEO-and-performance consequence — are webperf-wiki/core-web-vitals, the canonical target for a bare [[core-web-vitals]]. Deliberate dual-lens (HUB.md).

Google’s standardized field metrics for real-world page experience (loading, interactivity, visual stability — LCP / INP / CLS). Used across our sources as the runtime performance yardstick that distinguishes platforms.

In our sources

• astro: 66% of real sites pass (Astro’s own data) — ahead of wordpress (48%), Gatsby (47%), Next.js (30%), Nuxt (28%).
• wordpress-market-share-decline lists weaker Core Web Vitals among the structural reasons share is leaking to faster platforms.
• core-web-vitals-wordpress-astro — an independent CrUX field-data ranking (Apr 2026) of seven platforms: Duda 85%, Wix 80%, Shopify 79%, Astro 67%, Drupal 64%, Joomla 58%, WordPress 49%. Corroborates Astro (~66–67%) and WordPress (~48–49%) from a more neutral source, but shows Astro is mid-pack, behind hosted site builders.

Page weight is not destiny

core-web-vitals-wordpress-astro argues real-world CWV is driven by architecture and efficient delivery, not minimal payload: Shopify has the heaviest median page (3.77 MB) and worst lab scores yet ranks 3rd in the field. This is the key tension with the sibling webperf-wiki (byte-budget minimalism) — see synthesis.

Cross-wiki note

This is the natural bridge to the sibling webperf-wiki (page-weight minimalism, byte budgets): Core Web Vitals is where the static-site-generator story and the web-performance story meet. Links are kept within a wiki, so this page just flags the adjacency rather than linking across — see synthesis.

Related

static-site-generator · static-site-publishing · astro · wordpress · core-web-vitals-wordpress-astro · wordpress-market-share-decline · synthesis