Visualizations of third-party script impact across the web - thirdpartyweb.today
· 1 month ago
A free, well-cited reference for judging third-party script impact — any web performance team should bookmark it. Skip it if you need live monitoring, support, or vendor accountability; it's one author's open-source project.
Confidence
Medium. Based on ~30 public sources; no independent user reviews found.
Ratings
Value for money
Ease of use
Feature depth
Support qualityNo support information in sources
Security posture
Pricing
$0
Free
ModelNot disclosed
Monthly feesNot disclosed
HardwareNot disclosed
Free tierYes
Best for
→Performance engineers vetting third-party tags
→Vendor selection research
→Core Web Vitals budgeting
→Researchers citing script impact data
Not for
×Teams needing live monitoring of their own site
×Non-technical buyers wanting dashboards and support
×Privacy or compliance audits of your own pages
×Anyone expecting SLAs or vendor accountability
Gotchas - check before you buy
medium
Not a product: no SLA, support, or update guarantees; effectively one maintainer.
medium
Vendors cite its rankings in marketing; numbers may be dated or cherry-picked.
low
Guess: dataset reflects periodic crawls, so newest tags may lag reality.
Pros and cons
Pros
+Completely free and open-source
+Cited by Chrome DevRel, Web Almanac, and Akamai
+Treemaps, per-page impact metrics, and entity search
+Independent enough that competing vendors cite it
+Used in peer-reviewed academic research
Cons
−Aggregate web-wide data, not monitoring of your pages
−Open-source side project; no vendor, support, or SLA
−Security posture of the repo scores poorly, per Linux Foundation
−Guess: developer-oriented; marketers get no hand-holding
Sources & method
- 9 sources - No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.
official x3review x1security x1news x4
Key stats
Value for money: 5/5
Rating
$0
Starting price
9
Sources
Analyzed
Value for money: 5/5. Free and open source
Ease of use: 4/5. Web UI with treemaps and entity search
Feature depth: 3/5. Aggregate web-wide data and visualizations only
Support quality. No support information in sources
Security posture: 2/5. Linux Foundation flags weak security posture
Free Price Open-source project
2019 First public coverage Gigazine review, June 2019
57% Third-party JS share Of JS execution, per its analysis
Chrome, Web Almanac, Akamai Notable citations Vendor and research references
Pricing
Free
$0
Web visualizations
Entity data tables
npm dataset
Security
No known vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.
What users say
No independent user reviews found; usage evidence comes from vendor blogs, Chrome DevRel, and academic citations.
Alternatives
Compare Thirdpartyweb with each alternative.
Lighthouse
Free Chrome audits of your page's third-party cost
4.Can browsers optimize the loading of third-party resources? (Chrome) https://developer.chrome.com/blog/third-party-scripts
5.Web Almanac 2020 Mobile Web https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2020/mobile-web
6.Gigazine coverage, June 2019 https://gigazine.net/gsc_news/en/20190626-third-party-web/
7.Akamai: Metrics That Matter https://www.akamai.com/blog/performance/metrics-that-matter-continuous-performance-optimization
8.Linux Foundation Insights project health https://insights.linuxfoundation.org/project/patrickhulce-third-party-web
9.WRAP academic paper citing the dataset https://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/160220/1/WRAP-analysis-third-party-request-structures-detect-fraudulent-websites-Gopal-2021.pdf
Comments
One queue. No nested comments. Give a display name first. Limit: 200 words per comment and 7 comments per day. You can edit or delete yours.
No comments yet.