LiteSpeed cache and CloudFlare would've been good options to include aswell. With the right CloudFlare rules you can give your site huge speed boosts, over and above their default settings.
You have put a great amount of time into producing this video and it is highly appreciated. Thank you very much! Feels to me as if this optimizing/caching task is underrated and this video comes to show the importance, plus gives the 'what' and 'how'. Good stuff!
I use Litespeed server, litespeed cache and Asset clean up to remove some js & css (contact form for example) from certain pages / all post. 5 sites, all sub 1 second with the heaviest page @ 1.46 Mb. For the price, I don't think it can be beat. Edit: That's on shared hosting
Great comparison vid ( I would have preferred to see tested on meatier site, w larger MB, parallax, on scroll animations) and as far as free cache plugins Swift has been a fav of mine for a few years 🙌🏻⚡️💪🏻💻💥👍🏻
Love your videos Paul! have you ever posted anything about your video workflow such as what you use for screen recording/titles/animations and equipment?
Yet again another excellent informative review. You mentioned that you use Siteground as your host. Do you use and indeed how do you rate their Supercache plugin. Did you enable or disable the Supercache plugin during your review?
No, I didn't enable any hosting baching caching options. This was a straightforward head to head of the plugins covered. I only really use SiteGround as a testbed for tutorials and keep the server tweaking to a minimum as they are not mission-critical sites.
I love your videos, thanks for such awesome tutorials. I am a new web developer and started using Elementor and WP on my first website. You have really helped me come up to speed quickly with your easy to understand and easy to follow tutorials. I am building my second website now and have 2 more in the queue because of Elementor and your tutorials. Now, for an odd question; what speaker stands are you using on your desk? I have a set of Bowers and Wilkens 706 S2 speakers I want to set on my desk.
Great the hear these videos have helped you get going with WP & Elementor. :) The speaker stands I'm using are these: www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B072R7FM9H/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 They are pretty good and not crazy expensive. They also come in 2 heights in the box.
Thanks for making this video. Woocommerce site with Astra slug Theme. I tried Swift, but my website was crashing every 8 hours or so and required re-booting. Then I tried W-P Optimize and my product category images promptly disappeared on mobile. W-P Optimize also reduced several of my products to 'problem issues' on google page experience as my mobile scores dropped to high 30's. Google shows 'minify' as a part of the problem. Played around with various settings and managed to get images to disappear from product categories on desktop... Panic....I have everything turned off now and all of the caching plugins disabled as my website is my living... Support for Swift is non-existent. All I wanted to do was increase my google mobile speed a bit...
Hi Paul, another great assessment. What I wondered is what would be your recommended free WP Cache Plugin? I have finished a client site from a purchased template but it is running pretty slow. GTMetrics D D 4.7sec 1.38MB 80. I'll have to do some work on it.
I'd take a look at Autoptimise and if they can stretch the budget a little and depending upon their audience's location, Bunny CDN as a starting point. Also, it may be worth doing a little testing with this plugin to remove unused assets on the pages/templates in use: wordpress.org/plugins/wp-asset-clean-up/
Thank you for this video! Regarding NitroPack you can be sure that it´s not something for pagespeed but truely fakespeed. On Google Pagespeed Insights an the common 3rd party lighthouse analyzers, it just manipulates the value while a definite and physical improvement will for sure not to be expected. I suggest to search via google using the following: +nitropack +fakespeed. I by myself made test on Google Chorme´s waterfall. 1st with deactivated NitroPack, result: wide bars showing each numbers. 2nd with acitvated NitroPack, result: Much smaller bars looking like high performance but the numbers are the same as in the deactivated test. So NitroPack is nothing but fake.
NitroPack is a Black Hat SEO speed optimisation plugin. The rendering of the website made with the NitroPack plugin in the Page Metric Test Tools is based entirely on the inline CSS and JS in the HTML file without taking into account additional numerous CSS or JS files loaded on the page. As a result, the final metric score does not include CSS and JavaScript files evaluation and parsing. Technically speaking, websites with the NitroPack plugin never become interactive in the Page Metric Tools because all interactivity is derived from JavaScript and CSS execution. So, their "Time to Interactive" and "Speed Index" should be reported as equal to infinity. Our study at www.webwhim.co.uk/how-to-select-a-web-design-agency/#NitroPack indicates something fishy on a par with the Dieselgate scandal. It might take time for Google to retaliate with the sanctions against domains served by the NitroPack. You might decide for yourself whether it makes sense to pay $250 per year for a privilege to risk losing your hard-earned Google ranking.
Hey! What you’re describing is JS and CSS “lazy loading”. NitroPack offers the first real-world implementation of this that works and yields those fantastic results. Site owners should be looking at Core Web Vitals. That’s directly going to impact their ranking. Google's ranking update is going to rely on the real world data, not lab data. If a solution works in the real world and provides real benefits to the users that would mean that it works, wouldn't it? Here is a video from NitroPack's CEO on the matter: ruclips.net/video/vXdsU7ISWaM/видео.html Detailed explanation on from NitroPack’s blog: nitropack.io/blog/post/faq-nitropack-is-not-magic
I haven't tested them on CDN's in this example. My aim was to provide an 'out of the box' comparison that the average WordPress user looking for a simple way of boosting performance could see what options are available and the impact they could make with minimal tweaking and knowledge of the under the hood stuff. I'm sure tying into a CDN (where applicable) would add a little extra 'something'. You can see that NitroPack, which has a CDN as part of it faired really well in the comparison.
I typically combine Autoptimize with a page cache like Cache Enabler, since Autoptimize isn't a cache, it's just for performance tuning. I've always thought of it as the best. What I'm realizing now is that a lot of cache tools have added the performance features, minification, optimization etc, so the all-in-one approach is looking better and better compared to using dual plugins. Funny how WP Optimize got the "could do better" C+ rating but also came in as the recommended choice, due to great score and being a free option. I do agree their UI/UX just feels "off" somehow, it needs work. Any reason to not test W3 Total Cache? Has free option, million+ installs?
I ‘m using wp-Rocket and it really make the difference (AC 2,7). A few times ago, I added assets clean up free, but, what is strange, I have a worst notation (CD 2,7). And less request 140 -> 119. So don’t know exactly what to do: stop or not stop assets clean up?
I ‘m usine wp-Rocket and it really make the difference (AC 2,7). A few times ago, I added assets clean up free, but, what is strange, I have a worst notation (CD 2,7). And less request 140 -> 119. So don’t know exactly what to do: stop or not stop assets clean up?
I haven't, but I may well do if I come back to do another round of testing with different options or if I look at a more comprehensive setup in the future.
I tried WP Rocket but it make my website downloadbale (download a file name "download" instead of show my website! This is the error in GTmetrix: Analysis Error The URL did not appear to be an HTML page (invalid Content-Type: application/octet-stream) How can I solve this problem?
I was using optimole to do images, sg optimizer for caching and Autoptimize for the css etc. I found that to be working faster than using wprocket and optimole. Testing it like you did with just Autoptimize, makes it look bad, but it doesnt handle caching so hard to compare to wp rocket which does it all
Yes this is true. AO has no cache, but it does miracles. I'm also using combination of Autoptimize with Fastest Cache and this duo seems to be working great on my sites. Nevertheless caching and optimizing plugins are helpful, the first and easiest way to make any site load faster is to take care of images (compress and sizing).
@@saminator358 yeah I found that optimole for the money does the job perfectly. Im only paying 10 eu a month and a lot of m are very expensive if u need to buy like those image credits. I also had the problem that some of the image optimizers deleted your old full size images and i ended up having images that were optimized two or three times. Now i can just flip optimole off and have all my baseline images on 100% quality to photoshop with
We need again this video. Because every plugin is now very much stable and optimized so we want to know which is best. If you need any help feel free to knock me I'm ready to help you. ☺️
I'm just curious, why would you prefer W3 Total Cache over Nitropack? I just tried Nitro on my site and I got incredible immediate results. On W3 we weren't really seeing that great of results.
@@Ephremjlm1 so that is a great question. You see, Nitropack is surely a great caching plugin, if you don't wanna tweak in all kind of settings. Unfortunately it is pretty expensive too, if you have a serious site and don't wanna get their lame banner in the bottom of your site. Atm it's costing 17USD per month compared to e.g. WP Rocket which charge 50usd per year. You can get the same results or even better with W3 total cache as you can get with both WP Rocket and even with Nitropack and they charge you 0USD per year. But to be fair, it is depending on the site, the structure and the size of the site. Also, I have noticed in some cases when you go for ludacris optimization on Nitropack, it is hiding some of the HTML which will damage your SEO score in the long run.
Sorry mate, but this just isn't the way to test those. Synthetic tests (and using only one for that matter) doesn't paint the whole picture. Why didn't you bother checking the front-end to see if anything is broken? Every single website I saw using Nitro has some ugly flash before content loading (like massive lazy load).
I did test the front end in the video on a couple of examples but didn't see the need to show that for each example (even though the site was tested for issues between each test). I agree there could have been additional tests included and if I make another video I will look at alternative tests like Google Page Speeds, etc.
I don't think it's as simple as X is better than Y. There is an abundance of factors that can influence the effectiveness of any given caching tool on a server setup and site.
NitroPack is a Black Hat SEO speed optimisation plugin. The rendering of the website made with the NitroPack plugin in the Page Metric Test Tools is based entirely on the inline CSS and JS in the HTML file without taking into account additional numerous CSS or JS files loaded on the page. As a result, the final metric score does not include CSS and JavaScript files evaluation and parsing. Technically speaking, websites with the NitroPack plugin never become interactive in the Page Metric Tools because all interactivity is derived from JavaScript and CSS execution. So, their "Time to Interactive" and "Speed Index" should be reported as equal to infinity. Our study at www.webwhim.co.uk/how-to-select-a-web-design-agency/#NitroPack indicates something fishy on a par with the Dieselgate scandal. It might take time for Google to retaliate with the sanctions against domains served by the NitroPack. You might decide for yourself whether it makes sense to pay $250 per year for a privilege to risk losing your hard-earned Google ranking.
Hey! What you’re describing is JS and CSS “lazy loading”. NitroPack offers the first real-world implementation of this that works and yields those fantastic results. Site owners should be looking at Core Web Vitals. That’s directly going to impact their ranking. Google's ranking update is going to rely on the real world data, not lab data. If a solution works in the real world and provides real benefits to the users that would mean that it works, wouldn't it? Here is a video from NitroPack's CEO on the matter: ruclips.net/video/vXdsU7ISWaM/видео.html Detailed explanation on from NitroPack’s blog: nitropack.io/blog/post/faq-nitropack-is-not-magic
![Eminem - Fuel (Shady Edition) feat. Westside Boogie & GRIP [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/k1OquBida9s/mqdefault.jpg)
LiteSpeed cache and CloudFlare would've been good options to include aswell. With the right CloudFlare rules you can give your site huge speed boosts, over and above their default settings.
Where can you learn more best CloudFlare settings?
You have put a great amount of time into producing this video and it is highly appreciated. Thank you very much! Feels to me as if this optimizing/caching task is underrated and this video comes to show the importance, plus gives the 'what' and 'how'. Good stuff!
Another great job Paul. Tweaking these plugins has always confused me. Great tutorial and great audio/video work too:)
Thank you Gene. Hopefully, this helped in a small way to dispel some of the confusion surrounding them.
Very good, comprehensive analysis of current WP caching plugins. Thank you for taking the time (and money!!) to do this. Props.
My pleasure. :0)
Your videos are great ! Many thanks for keeping us on the forefront of progress. Your knowledge is impressive.
WP Fastest Cache would have a good one to test. Easy to set up and great performance, even the free version.
that's working well for me!
I like your new cutaway shot man 👍 Rest of the video is great too of course! 😁
Amazing results from using Nitro! I was using lite speed but Nitro blows it out the water and so much easier to use and set up. Thanks for this 👍
I use Litespeed server, litespeed cache and Asset clean up to remove some js & css (contact form for example) from certain pages / all post. 5 sites, all sub 1 second with the heaviest page @ 1.46 Mb. For the price, I don't think it can be beat.
Edit: That's on shared hosting
good advice, what's your hosting provider?
Enjoy your beer mate. That's being a trooper for the cause, right there. :D
Great comparison vid ( I would have preferred to see tested on meatier site, w larger MB, parallax, on scroll animations) and as far as free cache plugins Swift has been a fav of mine for a few years 🙌🏻⚡️💪🏻💻💥👍🏻
Many thanks mate for this in-depth run through - very informative!
My pleasure Uffe. I hope you could take something away from the content.
Love your videos Paul! have you ever posted anything about your video workflow such as what you use for screen recording/titles/animations and equipment?
No, I haven't. I guess if enough people were interested I'd put something of the BTS together.
What about WP Fastest Cache?
Yet again another excellent informative review. You mentioned that you use Siteground as your host. Do you use and indeed how do you rate their Supercache plugin. Did you enable or disable the Supercache plugin during your review?
No, I didn't enable any hosting baching caching options. This was a straightforward head to head of the plugins covered. I only really use SiteGround as a testbed for tutorials and keep the server tweaking to a minimum as they are not mission-critical sites.
I love your videos, thanks for such awesome tutorials. I am a new web developer and started using Elementor and WP on my first website. You have really helped me come up to speed quickly with your easy to understand and easy to follow tutorials. I am building my second website now and have 2 more in the queue because of Elementor and your tutorials.
Now, for an odd question; what speaker stands are you using on your desk? I have a set of Bowers and Wilkens 706 S2 speakers I want to set on my desk.
Great the hear these videos have helped you get going with WP & Elementor. :)
The speaker stands I'm using are these: www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B072R7FM9H/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
They are pretty good and not crazy expensive. They also come in 2 heights in the box.
@@WPTuts very cool, thanks!
Thanks for making this video. Woocommerce site with Astra slug Theme. I tried Swift, but my website was crashing every 8 hours or so and required re-booting. Then I tried W-P Optimize and my product category images promptly disappeared on mobile. W-P Optimize also reduced several of my products to 'problem issues' on google page experience as my mobile scores dropped to high 30's. Google shows 'minify' as a part of the problem. Played around with various settings and managed to get images to disappear from product categories on desktop... Panic....I have everything turned off now and all of the caching plugins disabled as my website is my living... Support for Swift is non-existent. All I wanted to do was increase my google mobile speed a bit...
Hi Paul, another great assessment. What I wondered is what would be your recommended free WP Cache Plugin? I have finished a client site from a purchased template but it is running pretty slow. GTMetrics D D 4.7sec 1.38MB 80. I'll have to do some work on it.
I'd take a look at Autoptimise and if they can stretch the budget a little and depending upon their audience's location, Bunny CDN as a starting point.
Also, it may be worth doing a little testing with this plugin to remove unused assets on the pages/templates in use: wordpress.org/plugins/wp-asset-clean-up/
Thank you for this video! Regarding NitroPack you can be sure that it´s not something for pagespeed but truely fakespeed. On Google Pagespeed Insights an the common 3rd party lighthouse analyzers, it just manipulates the value while a definite and physical improvement will for sure not to be expected. I suggest to search via google using the following: +nitropack +fakespeed.
I by myself made test on Google Chorme´s waterfall. 1st with deactivated NitroPack, result: wide bars showing each numbers. 2nd with acitvated NitroPack, result: Much smaller bars looking like high performance but the numbers are the same as in the deactivated test. So NitroPack is nothing but fake.
Hi Paul .. I really enjoy your Tutorials 👏✨✨✨🔥🔥🔥
Great content as usual, thanks!
Is this website content you have on the WordPress site available as an import?
It seems good for testing.
great video! what are you using for your live screen recording?
I believe it's Movavi Screen Recorder in this video.
@@WPTuts amazing thanks! I did a sample and had a 1080p 60-second clip only be 11MB which is stellar, very easy to use
NitroPack is a Black Hat SEO speed optimisation plugin.
The rendering of the website made with the NitroPack plugin in the Page Metric Test Tools is based entirely on the inline CSS and JS in the HTML file without taking into account additional numerous CSS or JS files loaded on the page. As a result, the final metric score does not include CSS and JavaScript files evaluation and parsing. Technically speaking, websites with the NitroPack plugin never become interactive in the Page Metric Tools because all interactivity is derived from JavaScript and CSS execution. So, their "Time to Interactive" and "Speed Index" should be reported as equal to infinity.
Our study at www.webwhim.co.uk/how-to-select-a-web-design-agency/#NitroPack indicates something fishy on a par with the Dieselgate scandal. It might take time for Google to retaliate with the sanctions against domains served by the NitroPack. You might decide for yourself whether it makes sense to pay $250 per year for a privilege to risk losing your hard-earned Google ranking.
Hey!
What you’re describing is JS and CSS “lazy loading”. NitroPack offers the first real-world implementation of this that works and yields those fantastic results.
Site owners should be looking at Core Web Vitals. That’s directly going to impact their ranking. Google's ranking update is going to rely on the real world data, not lab data. If a solution works in the real world and provides real benefits to the users that would mean that it works, wouldn't it?
Here is a video from NitroPack's CEO on the matter: ruclips.net/video/vXdsU7ISWaM/видео.html
Detailed explanation on from NitroPack’s blog: nitropack.io/blog/post/faq-nitropack-is-not-magic
Nice video I think you mis the Wp fastest cache and litespeed cache
Paul great video! have you tested with cdn, any difference?
I haven't tested them on CDN's in this example. My aim was to provide an 'out of the box' comparison that the average WordPress user looking for a simple way of boosting performance could see what options are available and the impact they could make with minimal tweaking and knowledge of the under the hood stuff.
I'm sure tying into a CDN (where applicable) would add a little extra 'something'. You can see that NitroPack, which has a CDN as part of it faired really well in the comparison.
@@WPTuts NitroPack I will check it, is it free include cdn too ur can use cloudflare?
So LiteSpeed vs Fastest Cache vs Borlabs Cache vs A few plugins used together, any comments?
I'm using litespeed plugin with hostinger hosting, they are doing well.
@@oqba how fast, do you use cdn too?
like your videos very much - highly appreciated!
wp super cach works really great for me
I typically combine Autoptimize with a page cache like Cache Enabler, since Autoptimize isn't a cache, it's just for performance tuning. I've always thought of it as the best. What I'm realizing now is that a lot of cache tools have added the performance features, minification, optimization etc, so the all-in-one approach is looking better and better compared to using dual plugins.
Funny how WP Optimize got the "could do better" C+ rating but also came in as the recommended choice, due to great score and being a free option. I do agree their UI/UX just feels "off" somehow, it needs work.
Any reason to not test W3 Total Cache? Has free option, million+ installs?
I ‘m using wp-Rocket and it really make the difference (AC 2,7). A few times ago, I added assets clean up free, but, what is strange, I have a worst notation (CD 2,7). And less request 140 -> 119. So don’t know exactly what to do: stop or not stop assets clean up?
i would love the video about how you white labeled your dashboard. :P
I ‘m usine wp-Rocket and it really make the difference (AC 2,7). A few times ago, I added assets clean up free, but, what is strange, I have a worst notation (CD 2,7). And less request 140 -> 119. So don’t know exactly what to do: stop or not stop assets clean up?
Paul have you tested webhosting with litespeed instead of apache and litespeed cache plugin?
I haven't, but I may well do if I come back to do another round of testing with different options or if I look at a more comprehensive setup in the future.
I tried WP Rocket but it make my website downloadbale (download a file name "download" instead of show my website! This is the error in GTmetrix: Analysis Error
The URL did not appear to be an HTML page (invalid Content-Type: application/octet-stream)
How can I solve this problem?
I was using optimole to do images, sg optimizer for caching and Autoptimize for the css etc. I found that to be working faster than using wprocket and optimole. Testing it like you did with just Autoptimize, makes it look bad, but it doesnt handle caching so hard to compare to wp rocket which does it all
Yes this is true. AO has no cache, but it does miracles. I'm also using combination of Autoptimize with Fastest Cache and this duo seems to be working great on my sites. Nevertheless caching and optimizing plugins are helpful, the first and easiest way to make any site load faster is to take care of images (compress and sizing).
@@saminator358 yeah I found that optimole for the money does the job perfectly. Im only paying 10 eu a month and a lot of m are very expensive if u need to buy like those image credits. I also had the problem that some of the image optimizers deleted your old full size images and i ended up having images that were optimized two or three times. Now i can just flip optimole off and have all my baseline images on 100% quality to photoshop with
We need again this video. Because every plugin is now very much stable and optimized so we want to know which is best. If you need any help feel free to knock me I'm ready to help you. ☺️
I would have expected to see WP Fastest Cache in this.
Me too
So many options and soooo little time! ;)
Who's to say I won't do round 2? 😉
Not using the best caching plugin - even destroying some paid versions - in this tutorial is kind of lame.
W3 Total Cache FTW.
I'm just curious, why would you prefer W3 Total Cache over Nitropack? I just tried Nitro on my site and I got incredible immediate results. On W3 we weren't really seeing that great of results.
@@Ephremjlm1 so that is a great question. You see, Nitropack is surely a great caching plugin, if you don't wanna tweak in all kind of settings. Unfortunately it is pretty expensive too, if you have a serious site and don't wanna get their lame banner in the bottom of your site. Atm it's costing 17USD per month compared to e.g. WP Rocket which charge 50usd per year. You can get the same results or even better with W3 total cache as you can get with both WP Rocket and even with Nitropack and they charge you 0USD per year. But to be fair, it is depending on the site, the structure and the size of the site. Also, I have noticed in some cases when you go for ludacris optimization on Nitropack, it is hiding some of the HTML which will damage your SEO score in the long run.
I noticed that you have SG Optimizer installed, though deactivated. How does this compare ... ballpark?
I didn't test it as it was a service-based option and not something that anyone on any server could use.
@@WPTuts Fair comment.
How do they work with cloudlfare and do we get even a better result?
I guess it would depend on what your using in CloudFlare. If it's just the CDN then I believe they should work fine.
RUclips autoplay, thank you!
Sorry mate, but this just isn't the way to test those. Synthetic tests (and using only one for that matter) doesn't paint the whole picture. Why didn't you bother checking the front-end to see if anything is broken? Every single website I saw using Nitro has some ugly flash before content loading (like massive lazy load).
I did test the front end in the video on a couple of examples but didn't see the need to show that for each example (even though the site was tested for issues between each test).
I agree there could have been additional tests included and if I make another video I will look at alternative tests like Google Page Speeds, etc.
sir, where is lite speed cacher
Where's Litespeed cache?
best way to optimize your website, this is good code, not a plugin.
None of those. Litespeed Caché plugin, breaks everyone's face.
Are you sure? Did you see the NitroPack results?
LiteSpeed the only that breaks is sites.
Thanks, you could have downloaded from GPLMonster.com
I like to make sure that I support the developers and have access to tech support should I need it. 👍
Breeze is faster.
I don't think it's as simple as X is better than Y. There is an abundance of factors that can influence the effectiveness of any given caching tool on a server setup and site.
Cached plugins only need broken hands
lol, you want to know how to speed up your website? Don't use WordPress!
NitroPack is a Black Hat SEO speed optimisation plugin.
The rendering of the website made with the NitroPack plugin in the Page Metric Test Tools is based entirely on the inline CSS and JS in the HTML file without taking into account additional numerous CSS or JS files loaded on the page. As a result, the final metric score does not include CSS and JavaScript files evaluation and parsing. Technically speaking, websites with the NitroPack plugin never become interactive in the Page Metric Tools because all interactivity is derived from JavaScript and CSS execution. So, their "Time to Interactive" and "Speed Index" should be reported as equal to infinity.
Our study at www.webwhim.co.uk/how-to-select-a-web-design-agency/#NitroPack indicates something fishy on a par with the Dieselgate scandal. It might take time for Google to retaliate with the sanctions against domains served by the NitroPack. You might decide for yourself whether it makes sense to pay $250 per year for a privilege to risk losing your hard-earned Google ranking.
Hey!
What you’re describing is JS and CSS “lazy loading”. NitroPack offers the first real-world implementation of this that works and yields those fantastic results.
Site owners should be looking at Core Web Vitals. That’s directly going to impact their ranking. Google's ranking update is going to rely on the real world data, not lab data. If a solution works in the real world and provides real benefits to the users that would mean that it works, wouldn't it?
Here is a video from NitroPack's CEO on the matter: ruclips.net/video/vXdsU7ISWaM/видео.html
Detailed explanation on from NitroPack’s blog: nitropack.io/blog/post/faq-nitropack-is-not-magic