Skip to main content
Metrics type: Supporting Metrics • Category: Website Performance

​
At a glance

All-3 CWV pass status broken down by page template, surfaces which templates pass CWV (LCP + INP + CLS all good simultaneously) vs which fail. The pre-launch readiness gate at template level: a site is launch-ready when every high-traffic template passes CWV, not just the average. Even one failing high-traffic template fails the launch gate; this card surfaces them.

​
Calculation

Calculated automatically from your Website Performance (PageSpeed + CrUX) data. See the At a glance summary above for what the metric tracks and the worked example below for a typical reading.

​
Worked example

A UK-based BigCommerce fashion store, per-template CWV pass status Wednesday 15 May 26. What the per-template pass view is telling us:
  1. Only 2 of 8 templates pass all 3 CWV (checkout step 1 and step 2). Combined traffic share of passing templates: 8%, meaning 92% of mobile traffic hits a template that’s failing CWV. Pre-launch readiness: NOT READY.
  2. All three primary content templates fail (homepage, PDP, collection). These are the highest-traffic templates (combined 75% of mobile traffic) and they’re failing on all three CWV simultaneously. Sustained pre-launch failure until these are fixed.
  3. Cart fails on INP only (passes LCP and CLS). Single-CWV failure means a focused fix is enough; closing INP from 220ms to 200ms requires modest cart-drawer work. Easiest fix path to a template passing.
  4. Account / login fails all three but has minimal traffic (1%). Low priority but still needs to pass before launch, pre-launch readiness gate doesn’t allow tail templates to skip.
  5. Recovery sequence to launch-readiness:
    • Week 1-2: Collection template (all-3 fix via image format + filter widget refactor + aspect-ratio CSS)
    • Week 3-4: Homepage template (image format + render-blocking + CSS aspect-ratio)
    • Week 5-6: PDP template (image + cart-drawer refactor)
    • Week 7: Search results (collection-pattern fix shared)
    • Week 8: Cart INP polish + account/login (low priority)
    • Result: 8 of 8 passing; launch-ready
  6. Cumulative effort estimation: 6-8 week focused optimisation cycle. Realistic launch-readiness target: 6 of 8 passing (75%), including all top-3 templates plus checkout. Tail templates (account, about, contact) can pass after launch without ranking impact.
The diagnostic flow:
  1. Identify failing templates × traffic share. High-traffic failing templates first.
  2. Decompose by sub-metric to know which CWV is dragging each template.
  3. Apply template-level fixes in priority order.
  4. Re-evaluate pre-launch gate after each ship.
Rapid-response playbook:

​
Sibling cards merchants should reference together

​
Reconciling against the vendor’s own dashboard

Where to look:
  • GSC Core Web Vitals → URL groups, surfaces URL groups (similar to templates) with pass/fail status.
  • PageSpeed Insights, per-URL field-data pass status.
Why the Vortex IQ template view may differ from GSC: Cross-connector reconciliation: primarily internal (with all per-template + per-URL CWV cards). Quick rule for support tickets: if a merchant says “my GSC shows passing but your card shows failing”, the difference is lab vs field. Field reflects ranking-impact reality; lab reflects engineering iteration state.

​
Known limitations / merchant FAQs

My homepage fails CWV but my checkout passes. Should I launch? For ranking-impact, no. Mobile-first indexing means the homepage failure costs ranking weight on competitive queries. Recommended pre-launch threshold: 80%+ of templates passing, with all top-3 traffic templates passing. Currently 25% passing, not launch-ready. Can I have one failing template and still launch? If it’s low-traffic (<5% share) and not the homepage. Account/login pages often fail CWV without significant ranking impact because Google doesn’t usually rank login URLs. Top traffic templates must pass. Why does the cart fail INP but not LCP/CLS? Cart-drawer mount has a heavy JS handler that blocks the main thread. Cart pages are otherwise lean, no large hero images, no late-loading widgets. The single dragging metric is JS-driven INP. Should I add Catalyst migration to launch criteria? Not as a hard requirement, but it accelerates passing. Catalyst sites typically pass CWV by default; Stencil sites need active optimisation work. The migration timeline is multi-month; the optimisation timeline is 6-8 weeks. Pick based on broader strategic context. Can Vortex IQ generate a launch-readiness report? Yes; the Vortex Mind Pre-Launch Readiness report combines this card’s per-template view with audit findings into a unified launch checklist.

​
Tracked live in Vortex IQ Nerve Centre

CWV Pass by Template is one of hundreds of KPI pulses Vortex IQ tracks across Website Performance (PageSpeed + CrUX) and 70+ other ecommerce connectors. Nerve Centre runs the detection layer; Vortex Mind investigates the cause when something moves; Ask Viq lets you interrogate any number in plain English. Start for free or book a demo to see this metric running on your own data.