Page Experience Report Explained (What Changed & What You Use Now)

The Page Experience Report was once one of the most visually intuitive reports inside Google Search Console (GSC). It gave site owners a single, unified snapshot of how well their pages aligned with Google's user experience standards.

However, in 2024, Google removed the Page Experience Report entirely.

This raised important questions for SEOs, developers, and site owners:

• Why did Google remove it?
• Does page experience still matter for rankings?
• Which reports replaced it?
• How should page experience be monitored now?

In this guide, you'll learn:

• What the Page Experience Report originally measured and why it mattered
• Why Google decided to remove it
• What tools and reports now replace it
• How to use modern page-experience signals for SEO and UX optimization

What Was the Page Experience Report in Google Search Console?

Overview: Why Google Introduced It

Google launched the Page Experience Report in 2021 as part of a broader initiative to make user experience a measurable, visible SEO factor.

The goal was not to introduce a single ranking signal, but to combine multiple experience-related metrics into one easy-to-understand dashboard. This allowed site owners to quickly see how much of their site met Google's recommended experience thresholds.

What Metrics Did the Page Experience Report Include?

The Page Experience Report was a summary report, not a diagnostic tool. It combined signals from multiple sources, including:

• Core Web Vitals
  • Loading performance (LCP)
  • Interactivity (FID at the time)
  • Visual stability (CLS)
• Mobile usability
• HTTPS security
• Safe browsing status
• Absence of intrusive interstitials

Rather than showing raw metrics, the report focused on pass / fail-style signals that indicated whether URLs met Google's experience criteria.

What the Dashboard Looked Like

The Page Experience dashboard provided:

• The percentage of URLs with "Good" page experience
• A trend line showing impressions over time
• A high-level summary of failing signals
• Direct links to related reports (Core Web Vitals, Mobile Usability, HTTPS)

This made it especially useful for stakeholders and non-technical decision-makers.

Why the Page Experience Report Mattered for SEO and UX

Page Experience as a Ranking-Related Signal

Google's long-term shift has been clear: rankings are not only about keywords and backlinks, but also about how users experience a page.

Page experience covered key aspects such as:

• Fast loading times
• Smooth interactivity
• Stable layouts
• Mobile friendliness
• Secure browsing

While page experience was never a dominant ranking factor, it acted as a tie-breaker signal, especially when content relevance was similar.

Impact Beyond Rankings

Improving page experience often resulted in:

• Lower bounce rates
• Higher engagement and time on site
• Improved conversion rates
• Better crawl efficiency

In practice, page experience benefited both SEO performance and user satisfaction, making it valuable even outside ranking discussions.

What Changed in 2024: Removal of the Page Experience Report

Google Removed the Dedicated Report

In 2024, Google officially removed the Page Experience Report from Google Search Console.

This was not the removal of page-experience signals themselves, but rather the removal of the aggregated summary dashboard.

Why Google Removed It

Google cited several reasons:

• The report duplicated information already available in other GSC reports
• It added interface complexity without providing new diagnostic insights
• Site owners needed to focus on specific actionable metrics, not summary scores

In short, Google shifted from overview dashboards to specialized, focused reports.

What Still Exists After Removal

Although the Page Experience Report is gone, its components remain:

• Core Web Vitals reports
• HTTPS status
• Mobile usability signals (where applicable)
• Security and safe browsing indicators

Nothing critical was removed — only the combined visualization layer.

What Replaces the Page Experience Report Today?

Core Web Vitals Report (Primary Replacement)

The Core Web Vitals report, located under the "Experience" section in GSC, is now the primary way to assess performance-related experience signals.

It covers:

• LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) for loading speed
• INP (Interaction to Next Paint) for responsiveness
• CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) for visual stability

The report:

• Separates mobile and desktop
• Groups URLs into Good / Needs Improvement / Poor
• Clusters URLs with similar issues for easier diagnosis

Other Signals to Monitor Separately

To fully replace the old Page Experience view, you now monitor:

• HTTPS status via security reports
• Mobile usability issues (when applicable)
• Manual actions and security issues
• Interstitial and UX best practices via guidelines, not reports

This modular approach aligns better with real-world optimization workflows.

How to Interpret Page-Experience Data in the New GSC Setup

Understanding URL Grouping

Core Web Vitals data is grouped by similar page templates or patterns, not individual URLs. Fixing a single underlying issue can improve hundreds or thousands of URLs at once.

Mobile vs Desktop Differences

Mobile performance often surfaces more issues due to:

• Slower networks
• Lower device performance
• More layout shifts from responsive design

Prioritize mobile experience first, as Google uses mobile-first indexing.

How to Use Page-Experience Signals for SEO and UX Optimization

Prioritization Strategy

• Start with Poor URLs
• Then address Needs Improvement
• Focus on template-level issues instead of single pages

Typical optimization areas include:

• Image optimization
• Script execution and deferral
• Layout stability fixes
• Mobile responsiveness
• Secure connections

Using Additional Tools

For pages with limited GSC data:

• Use PageSpeed Insights for combined lab and field data
• Use Lighthouse for audits and diagnostics
• Use browser DevTools for JavaScript and layout debugging

Establish a Recurring Workflow

Instead of one-off fixes:

• Review Core Web Vitals monthly or quarterly
• Monitor trends, not just pass/fail status
• Align performance checks with content and SEO audits

Limitations and Strategic Considerations

Not All Pages Have Data

Low-traffic pages may not show Web Vitals metrics due to insufficient real-user data. This is expected and not a penalty.

Performance Alone Doesn't Guarantee Rankings

Passing all experience metrics does not guarantee top positions. Content relevance, backlinks, intent matching, and authority remain essential.

Avoid Chasing Perfect Scores

A "100" score is not necessary. Focus on real user improvements, not cosmetic lab-tool metrics with diminishing returns.

Conclusion: Page Experience in the Post-Report Era

Although the Page Experience Report is gone, page experience itself is more important than ever.

Today's best practice is to:

• Monitor Core Web Vitals regularly
• Track HTTPS and security signals
• Combine UX optimization with content and SEO strategies
• Measure improvements over time using before-and-after benchmarks

Rather than relying on a single summary score, successful site owners now adopt a holistic, data-driven optimization workflow.

Optional: Historical Context for Older Audits

If you previously tracked the Page Experience Report:

• Compare historical scores with current Core Web Vitals trends
• Document major site changes (redesigns, migrations, theme updates)
• Use these records to understand long-term performance impact

Page experience may no longer have a single dashboard — but it remains a core pillar of technical SEO and sustainable growth.