Cacheable resource share and the Core Web Vitals

33.6% of audited sites (69,271) mark 80% or more of their subresources as cacheable and reach 84% good LCP (1.5s median), compared to 78% good LCP (1.6s median) on the 31.0% caching under 20% of resources.

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

33.6% of sites use 80%+ cacheable resources cacheable resource share, and 84% of those sites have a good LCP, against 82% of all sites.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · 126,761 with phone field data · 206,258 sites with cacheable resource shareBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
1

LCP pass rate

Sites with 80%+ cacheable resources cacheable resource share have a good LCP most often: 84%, against 82% of all sites. Sites with under 20% cacheable resources cacheable share have it least often, at 78%.

SitesGood, needs improvement, poor LCPMedian
All sites126,76182%1.6s
80%+ cacheable resources 33.6%42,27484%1.5s
50% to 79% cacheable resources 24.0%31,78084%1.5s
20% to 49% cacheable resources 11.5%14,86480%1.6s
Under 20% cacheable resources 31.0%37,84378%1.6s
GoodNeeds improvementPoorSites: with Chrome field data
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · 126,761 with phone field data · 206,258 sites with cacheable resource shareBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

Cacheable resource share usage

80%+ cacheable resources is the most used: 33.6% of sites.

80%+ cacheable resources 33.6% Under 20% cacheable resources 31.0% 50% to 79% cacheable resources 24.0% 20% to 49% cacheable resources 11.5%
80%+ cacheable resources 33.6% Under 20% cacheable resources 31.0% 50% to 79% cacheable resources 24.0% 20% to 49% cacheable resources 11.5%
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · 126,761 with phone field data · 206,258 sites with cacheable resource shareBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

LCP phase breakdown by share of cacheable subresources

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between 80%+ cacheable resources and under 20% cacheable resources sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 620 ms median for 80%+ cacheable resources against 765 ms for under 20% cacheable resources. Overall median field LCP is 1.5s for 80%+ cacheable resources (TTFB 620 ms, load delay 335 ms, load duration 158 ms, render delay 240 ms) versus 1.6s for under 20% cacheable resources.

Median LCP phase breakdown (Chrome field p75) Load delay Median LCP
Sites with cacheable resource share 92,470650 ms336 ms236 ms336 mslab 326 ms1.6s
Under 20% cacheable resources 26,299765 ms318 ms216 ms318 mslab 308 ms1.6s
80%+ cacheable resources 31,756620 ms335 ms240 ms335 mslab 325 ms1.5s
20% to 49% cacheable resources 10,441650 ms336 ms235 ms336 mslab 324 ms1.6s
50% to 79% cacheable resources 23,974589 ms356 ms253 ms356 mslab 349 ms1.6s
TTFB Resource load delay Resource load time Element render delay
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · 126,761 with phone field data · 206,258 sites with cacheable resource shareBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

Understanding cacheable resource share

How subresource Cache-Control coverage speeds up repeat visits and CDN edge hits

Cacheable resource share tracks the percentage of page requests carrying valid Cache-Control or Expires headers. Across 69,271 sites (33.6%) with 80%+ cacheable resources and 49,403 sites (24.0%) at 50% to 79%, 84% and 84% pass field LCP (1.5s and 1.5s median). When cacheability falls to 20% to 49% (11.5%), good LCP drops to 80% (1.6s median), and below 20% cacheable (31.0%, 63,848 sites) good LCP drops to 78% (1.6s median).

Ensure at least 80% of subresources return explicit Cache-Control max-age headers so browsers and CDN edges serve static assets without origin round-trips. Across all audited sites, 33.6% cache 80%+ of resources (84% good LCP) versus 31.0% caching under 20% (78% good LCP).

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · 126,761 with phone field data · 206,258 sites with cacheable resource shareBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
Platform & Framework Takeaways

How cacheable resource share plays out per platform

What the field data shows when you isolate a single CMS or framework.

WordPress 65,509 sites
72% vs 66% good LCP (80%+ vs <20% cacheable)

35.9% of WordPress sites mark under 20% of resources cacheable (66% good LCP vs 72% at 80%+).

Across 65,509 WordPress sites, 38.8% mark 80%+ of subresources as cacheable (72% good LCP), 17.3% cache 50% to 79% (74% good LCP), and 35.9% cache under 20% (66% good LCP).

Read the WordPress cacheable resource breakdown →
Shopify 8,573 stores
100% of Shopify stores cache 50%+ of resources

100% of Shopify stores cache at least 50% of subresources (96% good LCP at 80%+ cacheable).

Across Shopify storefronts, 61.3% mark 80%+ of resources as cacheable (96% good LCP) and 38.4% cache 50% to 79% (93% good LCP).

Read the Shopify cacheable resource breakdown →
React & Next.js 9,570 sites
88% vs 64% good LCP (80%+ vs <20% cacheable)

React & Next.js sites caching under 20% of resources (9.5%) pass LCP at 64% vs 88% at 80%+ (24 points apart).

Across React sites, 58.3% cache 80%+ of assets (88% good LCP), 28.8% cache 50% to 79% (86%), and 9.5% cache under 20% (64% good LCP).

Related signals HTML compression → Cache strategy mix → HTTP protocol mix → HTTP protocol → By Arjen Karel · 210,902 crawled sites (126,761 with phone Chrome field data, 206,258 sites with cacheable resource share, October 2026) · How we measured