google.com
76
VS
Search - Microsoft Bing
bing.com
86
R1 Speed
95 — 94google.com
bing.com
Evidence
- ◦ Largest paint: 1.8 s
- ◦ Blocking time: 210 ms
- ◦ Layout shift: 0.023
- ◦ Fast hands. Lighthouse approves.
- ◦ Largest paint: 1.9 s
- ◦ Blocking time: 10 ms
- ◦ Layout shift: 0.1
- ◦ Fast hands. Lighthouse approves.
R2 Accessibility
89 — 100google.com
bing.com
Ref · Pudge
“bing.com edges it 100–89. Close, but Pudge leans one way.”
Evidence
- ◦ Some of the crowd can't see the fight
- ◦ Lighthouse accessibility: 89/100
- ◦ Accessible to everyone in the arena
- ◦ Lighthouse accessibility: 100/100
R3 Typography
80 — 80google.com
bing.com
Ref · Pudge
“Dead even at 80. Pudge shrugs and waves it on.”
Evidence
- ◦ 4 font families — disciplined
- ◦ No <h1> found — the page whispers when it should punch
- ◦ System fonts or CSS-in-JS — can't fault what we can't see
- ◦ No <h1> found — the page whispers when it should punch
R4 Call to Action
60 — 60google.com
bing.com
Ref · Pudge
“Dead even at 60. Pudge shrugs and waves it on.”
Evidence
- ◦ No recognizable call to action — a shop with no door
- ◦ 10 links total
- ◦ No recognizable call to action — a shop with no door
- ◦ 4 links total
R5 Meta Hygiene
65 — 100google.com
bing.com
Ref · Pudge
“Clear round for bing.com, 100–65. google.com is on the ropes here.”
Evidence
- ◦ No Open Graph tags — shared links show up naked
- ◦ No favicon link — a blank face in the tab bar
- ◦ Open Graph present — dressed for the feed
- ◦ Canonical URL set
R6 Mobile Ready
50 — 85google.com
bing.com
Ref · Pudge
“Clear round for bing.com, 85–50. google.com is on the ropes here.”
Evidence
- ◦ No viewport meta — 2009 called
- ◦ Responsive viewport configured
- ◦ 1/1 images without dimensions — layout roulette
Pudge's decision
raises the winnerbing.comwins 86 — 76
google.com, want a rematch?
Pudge Studio rebuilds losing landing pages in 48 hours — design and engineering that wins the next fight.
Rebuild my page
“google.com edges it 95–94. Close, but Pudge leans one way.”