The State of Web Vitals

INP distribution

How INP is distributed across real-user data, plus pass-rate breakdown.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites October 2026 edition · All devices field outcomes
1

At a glance the headline numbers for INP distribution

How INP is distributed across real-user data, plus pass-rate breakdown.

94.7%
of sites pass INP
87ms
Typical site
153ms
Worst 10% of sites

94.7% of sites pass INP. The typical site's INP is 87ms. The worst 10% are above 153ms.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

The INP distribution site count at each INP, from good to poor

0 14,662 29,324 43,985 58,647
0–25ms144 sites0.1% of all sites
25–50ms5,013 sites3.2% of all sites
50–75ms40,118 sites25.8% of all sites
75–100ms58,647 sites37.7% of all sites
100–125ms24,787 sites15.9% of all sites
125–150ms10,549 sites6.8% of all sites
150–175ms5,311 sites3.4% of all sites
175–200ms2,826 sites1.8% of all sites
200–225ms1,756 sites1.1% of all sites
225–250ms1,237 sites0.8% of all sites
250–275ms1,402 sites0.9% of all sites
275–300ms1,439 sites0.9% of all sites
300–325ms702 sites0.5% of all sites
325–350ms334 sites0.2% of all sites
350–375ms208 sites0.1% of all sites
375–400ms152 sites0.1% of all sites
400ms and up1,003 sites0.6% of all sites
p50 = 87ms
p75 = 110ms
p90 = 153ms
p99 = 333ms
0–25 25–50 50–75 75–100 100–125 125–150 150–175 175–200 200–225 225–250 250–275 275–300 300–325 325–350 350–375 375–400 400+
Good (≤200ms) Needs improvement Poor (>500ms) Percentile markers Total: 155,628 sites

Most sites pass INP. 94.7% sit at or under 200ms. The typical site is at 87ms, and 75% of sites stay under 110ms. Only 5.3% fail INP. The slowest 10% are above 153ms, and the slowest 1% are above 333ms.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

The INP pass rate the share of sites that are good, needs improvement and poor

INP
94.7%
0.4%
Good Needs Improvement Poor

94.7% of sites pass INP. 4.8% are in the needs improvement band, between 200ms and 500ms. 0.4% are poor, above 500ms. A miss is usually needs improvement, not poor.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

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

Interaction to Next Paint measures how quickly the page responds when someone taps, clicks or types. It is the interactivity metric, and it is the one most sites struggle with, because it is decided by JavaScript. When the main thread is busy parsing and running scripts, it cannot respond to the interaction, and the visitor waits. Third-party tags and heavy frameworks are the usual cause.

Start by finding what runs on the main thread and cutting it down. Remove the scripts you do not need, defer the ones you do, and break up the long tasks that block input. Yielding to the main thread between chunks of work lets the browser handle interactions in between, instead of making the user wait for a long task to finish.

How are sites doing on INP?

94.7% of sites have a good INP. The typical site sits at 110ms at the 75th percentile; the slowest 1% pass 333ms.

Go fix it Yield to the main thread → 14 methods to defer JavaScript → Reduce unused JavaScript → Limit analytics and tracking scripts →
Related signals CLS → LCP → FCP → TTFB → 210,902 crawled sites with Chrome field data, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured