Google grades your 75th percentile. Most tools show you an average.

Three: Largest Contentful Paint (loading), Interaction to Next Paint (responsiveness) and Cumulative Layout Shift (visual stability). PingView also tracks First Contentful Paint and Time to First Byte as supporting diagnostics, because they usually explain why LCP is slow.

LCP is good at 2.5 seconds or less and poor above 4 seconds. INP is good at 200 milliseconds or less and poor above 500. CLS is good at 0.1 or less and poor above 0.25. Anything between good and poor is rated needs improvement.

Because an average is dominated by fast visits and hides the slow tail. The 75th percentile means three out of four visits were at least this good, which is the standard Google evaluates. PingView keeps p95 and p99 as well, so you can see how bad the worst quarter actually gets.

Lab data comes from a controlled audit on fixed hardware and a fixed network, so it is repeatable and good for comparing two versions of your code. Field data comes from real visitors on their own devices and connections, so it is noisy but it is what search evaluates. A large gap between them usually points at third-party scripts or real-world network conditions your lab run never sees.

They are part of Google's page experience signals, evaluated on field data at p75. They are one input among many and will not outrank relevance, but they act as a tiebreaker between comparable pages and they directly affect how many visitors abandon before the page becomes usable.

Field data through Real User Monitoring and scheduled Lighthouse audits are both part of the Professional plan, alongside synthetic monitoring, visual checks and security header scanning.