Hey yellow, I apologise I messed up the links 🙈. I still had it in my research list of not "enough data to back it up". Thanks for pointing this out, I will update it immediately!
Thank you. I'm very interested in all these performance topics. Do you see real improvement hosting your own fonts? Do you measure impacts with users using various browsers and devices?
In the wp-rocket blog post, all replies disagree with the author in the comment section. The author also compares Google Fonts with CDN to self hosted fonts for repeated usage, which is comparing apples with pears.
Adding a CDN for your static assets like self-hosted fonts improves performance, definitely. Therefore I wouldn't compare this.
The benchmark data on the wp-rocket blog post never made any sense to me either: in one network chart I can clearly see that self-hosted fonts is being requested faster than the Google Fonts network chart. But the document-ready signal is later initiated, which could mean that their implementation of self-hosted fonts are blocking the render, whereas the Google Fonts use font-display swap.
You see, so many assumptions and questions that I rather not trust that data.
Sorry again for bringing that link into the conversation.
I guess I'd better follow up with a clean benchmark post myself! :)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Hey yellow, I apologise I messed up the links 🙈. I still had it in my research list of not "enough data to back it up". Thanks for pointing this out, I will update it immediately!
Thank you. I'm very interested in all these performance topics. Do you see real improvement hosting your own fonts? Do you measure impacts with users using various browsers and devices?
On this article in your post, the wp rocket team seems to dismiss the idea that local fonts are faster. wp-rocket.me/blog/self-hosting-goo...
I'm very interested in these topics as well!
In the wp-rocket blog post, all replies disagree with the author in the comment section. The author also compares Google Fonts with CDN to self hosted fonts for repeated usage, which is comparing apples with pears.
Adding a CDN for your static assets like self-hosted fonts improves performance, definitely. Therefore I wouldn't compare this.
The benchmark data on the wp-rocket blog post never made any sense to me either: in one network chart I can clearly see that self-hosted fonts is being requested faster than the Google Fonts network chart. But the document-ready signal is later initiated, which could mean that their implementation of self-hosted fonts are blocking the render, whereas the Google Fonts use font-display swap.
You see, so many assumptions and questions that I rather not trust that data.
Sorry again for bringing that link into the conversation.
I guess I'd better follow up with a clean benchmark post myself! :)