> You don't have to get 100 score, but passing the core web vitals score and having higher score on mobile is recommended
Note that they don't have a CWV score yet due to low traffic. But a 39 performance score from the simulated Lighthouse is often more than enough for a passing grade. That is: if a Moto G4 can do OK, your normal users will likely do great.
For instance, a site I made[0] has a 22 from Lighthouse, but a passing CWV grade, so further improvement to the LCP, FID, and CLS would confer no direct Google SEO benefit.[1] (But it may help things like bounce rate, which may confer second-order benefits)
[1] "For example, a page with an LCP of 1750 ms (better than the “good” LCP guidance) and another one with 2500 ms (at the “good” guidance) would not be distinguished on the basis of the LCP signal" – https://support.google.com/webmasters/thread/104436075/core-...
Note that they don't have a CWV score yet due to low traffic. But a 39 performance score from the simulated Lighthouse is often more than enough for a passing grade. That is: if a Moto G4 can do OK, your normal users will likely do great.
For instance, a site I made[0] has a 22 from Lighthouse, but a passing CWV grade, so further improvement to the LCP, FID, and CLS would confer no direct Google SEO benefit.[1] (But it may help things like bounce rate, which may confer second-order benefits)
> by removing the lazy load effect from the LCP
Indeed. Even better, making it high priority instead of normal: https://addyosmani.com/blog/fetch-priority/
[0] https://i.imgur.com/TGD1sj2.png
[1] "For example, a page with an LCP of 1750 ms (better than the “good” LCP guidance) and another one with 2500 ms (at the “good” guidance) would not be distinguished on the basis of the LCP signal" – https://support.google.com/webmasters/thread/104436075/core-...