why WEB PERFORMANCE should be on every leader’s agenda

Web performance across the Nordics and Benelux is improving. More retailers are passing Core Web Vitals, mobile experiences are becoming faster, and the underlying technology has never been stronger. But that progress is not telling the full story.

Because when you look beyond the headline numbers, a different pattern emerges. Gains are uneven, desktop performance is stagnating, and much of the improvement is being driven by external factors like faster devices and better browsers, not by stronger execution.

For years, performance has been treated as a technical challenge. Today, that assumption is outdated. The real constraint is no longer capability, but prioritisation – and the brands that recognise this are starting to pull ahead.

THE ILLUSION OF PROGRESS

At first glance, the data looks encouraging. Mobile performance has improved significantly, with a +12 percentage point uplift in perceived loading speed since 2024. Accessibility scores have more than doubled, and more brands are meeting Core Web Vitals thresholds. On the surface, this looks like clear progress.

However, these improvements need to be understood in context. Over the same period, mobile devices have gained an estimated 20–40% increase in processing power, and 5G adoption has surged from 32.8% to 44.5% in just one year. Browser engines have become more efficient, and platform-level optimisations continue to raise the performance baseline across the web.

This helps explain why mobile experiences are improving. It does not explain why desktop performance is declining. Desktop environments already benefit from high processing power and stable connections, meaning they rely far less on external improvements. When performance drops here, it points to issues within the implementation itself. The broader benchmark reinforces this. Chrome UX data shows that a population of more than 19 million origins – including low-budget sites with minimal optimisation – is outperforming the Index on desktop loading experience.

At the same time, the numbers also reveal that more than 30% of users across the Index still encounter performance-related friction during their shopping journey. Given the well-established impact of delays on conversion, this translates directly into lost revenue. Taken together, this suggests that much of the observed improvement is not driven by better execution, but by a more forgiving environment. The result is an illusion of progress.

THE OPTIMISATION GAP

The decline in desktop performance is not caused by a single issue, but by the accumulation of complexity. Since 2024, the average use of third-party scripts has nearly doubled, both in terms of requests and total data transferred. While some of this growth reflects an increased focus on personalisation and customer insight, the overall impact is significant.

These are well-known issues, and they remain largely unchanged from previous years. What has changed is the volume. This is where the structural difference between mobile and desktop becomes important.

Mobile experiences are naturally constrained – fewer elements, simpler layouts, and a stronger link to conversion. Desktop environments, by contrast, tend to accumulate features, integrations, and experimentation. As complexity increases, so does the performance cost. Still, the technical foundation seems to be the missing piece of the puzzle.

Though we have all imaginable tools and knowledge available, we still see a staggering 6% showing great technical abilities on the synthetic tests across desktop. The root causes? Huge JavaScript bundles, poor page compositions and loads of third-party scripts flooding the sites.

THE AI PARADOX

AI has fundamentally changed how digital products are built. Teams are shipping faster, releasing more frequently, and accelerating experimentation across every part of the commerce stack.

But why has performance not followed? The reason is simple. AI accelerates execution – but performance depends on discipline. It requires restraint in how much is loaded, control over third-party integrations, and deliberate architectural decisions. These are not problems AI solves. In fact, the opposite is often true. Faster development cycles lead to more features, more scripts, and more complexity – added at a pace that outstrips optimisation.

We’re building more, faster – but not necessarily better. And while we are busy re-shaping our workflows with autonomy across the development lifecycle, the technical quality might drop gradually. This is a common pitfall when limiting human intervention for quality assurance if we don’t account for it specifically. Now is really the right time to close the technical gap.

THE LEADER’S DIFFERENTIATION

The top performers in this year’s index stand apart – not because they have access to better tools, but because they make different decisions. They prioritise performance at a strategic level. They limit unnecessary complexity. They challenge the addition of third-party scripts and features that do not directly contribute to business outcomes.

They measure what matters, using real user data, not just synthetic scores – and they treat performance as a continuous discipline, not a one-off optimisation effort. Most importantly, they assign ownership. Performance is not left to chance or buried within technical teams, it is governed.

FINAL REMARKS

The future is already here. The pace of innovation in digital commerce is accelerating faster than at any point in recent years, and with AI, software development is moving at a completely different speed. But priorities have not evolved at the same pace. The question many organisations still ask is: how do we deliver more features within the same budget? Far fewer are asking how to build better, faster, and more reliable experiences with fewer defects and less friction.

We already know that even small delays – measured in milliseconds – can drive double-digit changes in conversion. Yet the technical foundation required to support that performance remains underinvested. That is what makes this such a clear opportunity. While most brands continue to rely on external improvements to carry performance forward, a small group of leaders are actively taking control – and seeing the commercial impact. Performance is no longer a technical constraint. It is a leadership decision.