Scheduling impact

Performance impact by scheduling provider.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites Q1 2026 edition · Desktop field outcomes
Metric LCP INP CLS
1

At a glance the headline numbers for Scheduling impact

Performance impact by scheduling provider.

1
Providers ranked
After min-sites filter
823
Sites in sample
Combined across all items
60ms
Best INP (p75)
Calendly
The State of Web Vitals · Q1 2026 · 94,910 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

The ranking sorted by INP at p75, fastest first

# Provider INP p75 Passing Sites
1 Calendly 60ms 99.6%
823
The State of Web Vitals · Q1 2026 · 94,910 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing INP per provider which group passes the INP most often

ProviderSitesPassing INPp75
Cal.com 0% 5 100% 59ms
Calendly 0.9% 823 100% 60ms
Good Needs Improvement Poor Sorted best-passing first · median colored by its own rating · pass = good INP (200ms at p75) · one value per site
The State of Web Vitals · Q1 2026 · 94,910 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

All five vitals at once the whole category without toggling - cell is the pass rate, small number the p75

LCP
INP
CLS
FCP
TTFB
Calendly 0.9%
891.9s
10060ms
810.08
841.4s
65996ms
Acuity Scheduling 0%
Cal.com 0%
1001.1s
10059ms
1000.02
100786ms
100225ms
60%95%+ passing Cell: pass rate, small number = p75 · faded rows: under 100 sites

One row per provider, one column per vital - the cell is the share of sites passing, the small number the p75. No toggling needed to see where the category actually differs.

The State of Web Vitals · Q1 2026 · 94,910 sites · desktop field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
Related signals Reviews (8) → Customer data platforms (5) → Analytics (20) → Consent platforms (16) → Chrome field data from 94,910 sites, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured