WordPress cookie consent walls and the Core Web Vitals
38.1% of audited sites (24,129) present a blocking cookie consent wall on first visit (98% good INP, 91ms median), compared with 61.9% without a blocking wall (98% good INP, 81ms median).
61.9% of WordPress sites use no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls, and 65% of those sites pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 63% of all WordPress sites.
61.9% of WordPress sites use no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls, and 72% of those sites have a good LCP, against 70% of all WordPress sites.
61.9% of WordPress sites use no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls, and 98% of those sites have a good INP, against 98% of all WordPress sites.
61.9% of WordPress sites use no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls, and 90% of those sites have a good CLS, against 89% of all WordPress sites.
Core Web Vitals pass rate
Sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls pass all three Core Web Vitals most often: 65%, against 63% of all WordPress sites. The biggest gap is LCP, 72% against 70%.
Sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good LCP most often: 72%, against 70% of all WordPress sites. Sites with a blocking cookie wall cookie walls have it least often, at 67%.
Sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good INP most often: 98%, against 98% of all WordPress sites. Sites with a blocking cookie wall cookie walls have it least often, at 98%.
Sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good CLS most often: 90%, against 89% of all WordPress sites. Sites with a blocking cookie wall cookie walls have it least often, at 88%.
Cookie consent walls usage
No blocking cookie wall is the most used: 61.9% of WordPress sites.
Cookie consent walls per framework
jQuery sets the cookie consent walls to no blocking cookie wall on 61% of its sites, and 62% of jQuery sites pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 63% of all sites. Vue sets the cookie consent walls to a blocking cookie wall on 84% of its sites, and 61% of Vue sites pass all three.
jQuery sets the cookie consent walls to no blocking cookie wall on 61% of its sites, and 69% of jQuery sites have a good LCP, against 70% of all sites. Vue sets the cookie consent walls to a blocking cookie wall on 84% of its sites, and 68% of Vue sites have a good LCP.
jQuery sets the cookie consent walls to no blocking cookie wall on 61% of its sites, and 98% of jQuery sites have a good INP, against 98% of all sites. Vue sets the cookie consent walls to a blocking cookie wall on 84% of its sites, and 97% of Vue sites have a good INP.
jQuery sets the cookie consent walls to no blocking cookie wall on 61% of its sites, and 89% of jQuery sites have a good CLS, against 89% of all sites. Vue sets the cookie consent walls to a blocking cookie wall on 84% of its sites, and 89% of Vue sites have a good CLS.
Cookie walls or the framework
Does the framework explain the cookie consent walls difference?
On jQuery, 64% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 59% of jQuery sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within jQuery, sites with no blocking cookie wall pass all three more often. On Vue, 59% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 61% of Vue sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within Vue, sites with no blocking cookie wall and a blocking cookie wall pass all three about equally often.
On jQuery, 71% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good LCP, against 66% of jQuery sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within jQuery, sites with no blocking cookie wall have a good LCP more often. On Vue, 68% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good LCP, against 68% of Vue sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within Vue, sites with no blocking cookie wall and a blocking cookie wall have a good LCP about equally often.
On jQuery, 98% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good INP, against 98% of jQuery sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within jQuery, sites with no blocking cookie wall have a good INP more often. On Vue, 97% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good INP, against 97% of Vue sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within Vue, sites with no blocking cookie wall and a blocking cookie wall have a good INP about equally often.
On jQuery, 90% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good CLS, against 88% of jQuery sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within jQuery, sites with no blocking cookie wall have a good CLS more often. On Vue, 86% of sites with no blocking cookie wall cookie consent walls have a good CLS, against 89% of Vue sites with a blocking cookie wall. Within Vue, sites with no blocking cookie wall and a blocking cookie wall have a good CLS about equally often.
Why the Accept button is often the slowest interaction on the page
When a cookie wall blocks the page on first visit, the visitor's very first tap happens on the consent button. Many Consent Management Platforms (CMPs) synchronously update storage, remove DOM overlays, and initialize Google Tag Manager and marketing pixels inside that click handler. Across 24,129 sites (38.1%) with a cookie wall, median INP rises to 91ms (98% good INP, 88% good CLS), compared with a 81ms median INP (98% good INP, 90% good CLS) on the 39,166 sites (61.9%) without one.
Understanding cookie consent walls
Yield to the main thread via scheduler.yield() or setTimeout(0) between hiding the consent banner and firing tag-manager scripts on click, and style the banner as a fixed overlay so it never shifts page layout. On WordPress, 38.1% of sites display a cookie wall (98% good INP, 91ms median) while 61.9% load without one (98% good INP, 81ms median).
By Arjen Karel · 63,295 crawled WordPress sites (60,855 with all devices Chrome field data, October 2026). How we measured.