Googlebot’s crawling behavior significantly impacts a WordPress site’s SEO, indexing efficiency, and performance. This research explores the ideal distribution of crawl resources in Google Search Console (GSC), the effects of inlining CSS, and whether files like heartbeat.js and Astra font .woff should be crawled. We also examine the impact of JavaScript-heavy setups, particularly with GTM and third-party scripts, on search rankings. Additionally, we analyze different crawl scenarios and their consequences on Google’s indexing and ranking process. By optimizing crawl efficiency and Core Web Vitals, websites can improve their search visibility and user experience.
1. Ideal Crawl Resource Allocation (HTML, CSS, Images, JS, etc.)
Google’s Crawl Stats report in Search Console shows what types of files Googlebot is fetching on your site (HTML pages, images, CSS, JavaScript, fonts, etc.). There isn’t a one-size-fits-all “perfect” percentage for each type, since it depends on your site’s content. However, in general, you want the majority of Google’s crawl requests to go towards HTML pages (your content) and necessary media, rather than being skewed heavily toward CSS or JS files. (siteguru.co)
A healthy crawl profile usually has HTML and image files as significant portions, with CSS and JS being smaller portions of the total requests (siteguru.co).
For example, if half of your crawl requests were for CSS, that would be unusually high – it could indicate too many separate CSS files or overly frequent style changes. In contrast, having a large share of image requests might be normal for an image-heavy site (like a photography or e-commerce site), but you’d still want those images optimized so Google isn’t wasting time on overly large files.
Benchmarks: Google hasn’t published strict benchmarks for ideal percentages, but most well-optimized content sites see HTML as a solid chunk of crawl requests, images often next (depending on usage), and CSS/JS requests typically much lower. The goal is not a specific number, but to ensure Googlebot isn’t excessively busy fetching resources at the expense of your actual pages. One SEO guide suggests “optimize and minify code so your website doesn’t slow down” and ideally have Google crawl more HTML and images than JS/CSS (siteguru.co). In practice, this means reducing unnecessary JavaScript/CSS files, combining where possible, and using techniques like caching so these resources don’t need frequent re-crawling. If your site uses web fonts or other files, those might appear under “Other” file types – typically this should be a small slice of the crawl, often just font files (searchengineland.com).
In summary, an ideal crawl allocation is weighted toward your primary content (HTML) and essential images/media, with relatively fewer requests needed for scripts, styles, and other support files. If you see one category dominating (especially JS or CSS), it’s a signal to investigate optimization (e.g. combine files, defer loading) so that Google’s crawl budget is used efficiently on important content.
2. Low CSS Count After Inlining Styles – Is It OK?
Yes – reducing external CSS files by inlining critical styles is generally okay and often beneficial. If your Crawl Stats show CSS requests dropped from, say, 52% to 13%, it likely means you moved a lot of CSS into the HTML (inline) or eliminated some stylesheets. This is expected behavior after inlining: Googlebot no longer needs to fetch those separate .css files, so the proportion of CSS in crawl stats plummets. There’s nothing inherently wrong with a low CSS crawl count as long as your pages still render properly for Googlebot (which they should, since the CSS is now delivered with the HTML).
Inlining CSS (especially critical CSS for above-the-fold content) is a known performance optimization. External CSS files are render-blocking, meaning the browser (and Googlebot’s renderer) must fetch and load them before fully rendering the page (nitropack.io). By inlining important CSS in the HTML, you allow the page to render faster without waiting for an extra request. Google’s PageSpeed insights and web performance experts often recommend this technique: “an external CSS file can block above-the-fold content from appearing until the browser renders the rest of the page… By placing critical CSS in the head of the HTML, the browser can find it immediately without a separate request” (nitropack.io), (nitropack.io). So from a Core Web Vitals and user experience standpoint, inlining critical CSS is positive – it can improve Largest Contentful Paint by getting styles in place quicker.
Implications of low external CSS count:
Fewer HTTP requests for Googlebot and users. This reduces overhead and can speed up crawling and loading. Googlebot sees a simpler resource profile (the CSS is loaded within the HTML). This can be especially good for mobile devices (mobile-first indexing) where reducing round-trips improves speed.
Inline CSS means those styles are repeated in each HTML page rather than cached as a single file. If you inlined “most styles” (not just critical CSS), your HTML payload will be larger, and you lose the ability to cache that CSS across pages. For Googlebot, a bit more HTML to download isn’t usually an issue unless your pages become extremely large. (Keep HTML under Google’s 15 MB limit for indexing – but normal CSS amounts won’t approach that.) For users, the extra HTML size is often offset by the faster initial render, but very heavy inline CSS on every page could slightly increase data usage.
As long as the CSS is either inlined or accessible, Google can render the page properly. A drop in separate CSS files has no negative SEO impact by itself. Just ensure you didn’t accidentally remove or block any CSS that Google needs for rendering. It’s actually beneficial that Google now spends only 13% of crawl requests on CSS – those saved requests can go towards crawling more pages or other resources.
In summary, a very low CSS crawl count after inlining styles is not only okay – it’s often a sign of a more efficient setup. You’ve likely improved render speed. Just be mindful to inline only critical CSS or use strategy (e.g., inline critical, defer the rest) so that you’re not bloating every page with all styles. But from Google’s perspective, fetching one HTML with inline CSS is similar to fetching HTML+CSS separately; there’s no ranking penalty. It’s the page performance and content that matter, and you likely improved performance with this change.
3. Crawling heartbeat.js and Astra Font .woff – Impact on SEO?
WordPress Heartbeat (heartbeat.js) – This is a script used by WordPress for periodic background AJAX calls (for things like auto-saves, session management, etc.). On the front-end of a site, it’s usually not critical for content display. Googlebot will see the reference to heartbeat.js if it’s included in your pages, and may attempt to fetch it like any other JS file. Generally, it’s fine if Googlebot crawls heartbeat.js, but you also won’t lose anything by restricting it if it’s not needed. There’s no direct SEO benefit to Google fetching this file, since it doesn’t contain indexable content or contribute to rankings. The main effect is performance: the Heartbeat script itself is small, but it can trigger recurring AJAX calls (to admin-ajax.php) when running in a browser. Google’s crawler typically does not stay on the page long enough to trigger continuous Heartbeat AJAX calls, so it likely just fetches the JS file once and that’s it. It won’t harm your crawl budget in any significant way.
That said, many optimization plugins (like WP Rocket, Perfmatters, etc.) allow you to disable or limit Heartbeat on the front-end to save server resources. The reason is that Heartbeat can cause excessive AJAX requests that overburden your server CPU if left unchecked (savvy.co.il). For example, if multiple tabs are open, each might send Heartbeat calls, which is unnecessary for most public-facing pages (savvy.co.il). From an SEO perspective, disabling Heartbeat on the front-end can slightly improve performance (less load, faster response), but it will not change how Google indexes your content. If you see heartbeat.js in your Crawl Stats, it’s not inherently bad – it just means Googlebot saw a reference and fetched it. You can choose to block it via robots.txt or plugin settings to save a tiny bit of crawl activity, but be cautious: Google generally advises against blocking essential resources like JS, because they want to render the page fully. In this case, Heartbeat is not essential for layout or content, so blocking it won’t make your page appear broken to Google. It’s optional: either leave it (no harm done, aside from trivial crawl use), or disable it on front-end to eliminate that request altogether. Many sites successfully turn it off on front-end to boost performance with no issues. In fact, WP Rocket’s guidance is to disable Heartbeat API for front-end unless a plugin relies on it, which “significantly minimizes the number of requests” and improves load times (savvy.co.il), (savvy.co.il).
Astra font .woff files These are likely custom font files used by the Astra theme (perhaps icon fonts or custom webfonts). Googlebot treats font files as “other file types” in crawl stats, and it does fetch them if they are referenced in your CSS or HTML (searchengineland.com). Just like with CSS and JS, Google recommends not blocking font files, because they help render the page as intended. There’s no SEO content in a font file, but fetching it can affect how Google sees the layout (for example, if a font wasn’t loaded, maybe the layout or text spacing could differ, which might affect CLS or how content is displayed). In practice, fonts have minimal impact on crawl budget or indexing. Having Google crawl your .woff files is fine and expected – it allows Google’s rendering engine to use the correct font when snapshotting your page. There is no negative SEO impact from Google crawling fonts. It doesn’t hurt your rankings; it’s purely a resource for rendering. The only considerations are performance: large font files can affect page load for users, and if misconfigured could cause layout shifts (which affect Core Web Vitals). Astra is a performance-focused theme, so their fonts are likely optimized (and .woff is a compressed webfont format).
Should these files be crawled? In general, yes, allow Googlebot to crawl your JS and font files. Google’s documentation encourages letting Googlebot access CSS, JS, and other resources so it can fully understand your page. Heartbeat and Astra fonts are part of that. They do not inherently slow down Google’s crawling in any meaningful way. The Heartbeat script is small, and the font files will typically be downloaded once and then cached. There’s no need to specifically block them for Googlebot. Only consider blocking or disabling if you find these files are causing performance issues for your server or users. For example, if heartbeat.js was causing a lot of background activity, you’d disable it to improve load times – which indirectly helps SEO (site speed). But if it’s already mostly inlined or not firing, it’s not a big factor.
Bottom line: Googlebot crawling heartbeat.js and Astra .woff fonts is normal and not harmful. They don’t affect your SEO or performance negatively by mere crawling. Focus on optimizing these resources for users (e.g., limit Heartbeat usage via WP Rocket to reduce server load, and host fonts efficiently). But do not worry about Googlebot seeing or crawling them – it’s okay. If anything, having Google fetch your fonts/JS ensures it can render the page correctly, which is beneficial. As one SEO insight noted, the “other file types” in Crawl Stats (often fonts) are just part of the resources fetched, and it’s largely for rendering completeness (searchengineland.com).
4. JavaScript Overload – Does It Hurt SEO & How Googlebot Handles JS-Heavy Sites?
Modern Googlebot is quite advanced at handling JavaScript. Google now renders all HTML pages, even those reliant on heavy JS, as part of indexing (searchenginejournal.com). In a 2024 Google podcast, their engineers confirmed “we just render all of them (HTML pages), even sites relying heavily on JavaScript” (searchenginejournal.com). This means that if your WordPress site (or any site) includes a lot of JavaScript, whether it’s inline scripts, external files, Google Tag Manager (GTM) snippets, analytics, etc. Googlebot will still crawl and render the content. Simply having lots of JS files is not a direct ranking penalty. Google doesn’t give you a lower ranking just for using JavaScript. In fact, many sites use GTM and various JS libraries without issue.
However, there are important considerations with JS-heavy sites:
Crawling & Rendering Delays
JavaScript requires Google’s rendering engine (headless Chromium) to execute. Rendering JS is resource-intensive for Google (searchenginejournal.com), so extremely heavy or complex scripts can slow down how quickly Google processes your page. Google will first crawl the raw HTML, then later render the page to execute JS (the two-wave indexing). If your critical content only comes via JS, it might not be indexed until that rendering happens. In WordPress, most content (text, links) is in the HTML, so you’re usually safe. But if you rely on JS to inject content, ensure it’s crawlable or use server-side rendering. The good news is Google is committed to indexing JS content – “Google’s ability to handle JavaScript-heavy websites gives developers more freedom”but speed still matters. They note that while they can process it, “having a fast-loading website is still important” (searchenginejournal.com). So a JS-laden site might get indexed, but could be slower in delivering content to users and crawlers, which isn’t ideal.
Performance (Core Web Vitals)
Lots of JavaScript can hurt your page performance metrics. Large JS bundles or many scripts can delay the page’s Largest Contentful Paint (if they block rendering) and can especially impact interactivity metrics (First Input Delay or the newer INP). Google uses Core Web Vitals as a ranking factor (a part of the Page Experience update)(debugbear.com), albeit a modest one. If your JS usage makes your site slow or causes layout shifts, it can have a small negative ranking effect. More importantly, it affects user experience which can indirectly affect SEO (users leaving quickly, etc.). For example, loading ten different tracking scripts via GTM could add network requests and CPU overhead, making your page feel sluggish. Google’s guidance is: “Keep it simple when you can… try not to overdo it. Simpler websites are often easier for both Google and visitors” (searchenginejournal.com). This doesn’t mean remove all JS, but rather avoid unnecessary bloat.
GTM and third-party scripts
Google Tag Manager itself is just a container that loads other scripts. Googlebot typically doesn’t execute third-party analytics or ad scripts the same way a browser does (and those external requests to other domains won’t show in your crawl stats for your site). So they might not impact crawling budget, but they do impact load time for users. Ensure that non-critical tags are loaded asynchronously or after the main content. From an SEO perspective, it’s fine to use GTM to manage your scripts – just be mindful not to hide important content inside GTM-delivered code that might not render server-side. For instance, don’t use GTM to inject a chunk of HTML content that isn’t in the initial source. Use it mainly for analytics/tracking which doesn’t affect visible content.
Does a lot of JS hurt rankings directly?
Not directly. Google’s John Mueller and others have consistently said that if content is accessible and the page can be rendered, the use of JavaScript itself isn’t a negative ranking factor. In fact, Google’s rendering improvements mean JS-heavy sites can rank just fine. Many modern web apps that are JS-based (React, Angular, etc.) rank well after Google indexes their rendered content. The key is making sure Google can index it (use dynamic rendering or SSR if needed, or at least avoid blocking Googlebot). Also, ensure your important meta tags (title, description, etc.) are present in the initial HTML or in rendered output. If your WP site is mostly standard (content in HTML), you’re likely in good shape.
Caveats
If your JavaScript is broken or throws errors that prevent content from loading, that can hurt indexing. Also, if you load an enormous bundle for little benefit, you’re just slowing things down. For mobile-first indexing, remember mobile devices are slower – a mobile Googlebot will simulate that environment. Heavy scripts could degrade your mobile performance significantly, which could affect your mobile rankings. So optimize JS delivery: e.g., defer non-critical JS, minify and bundle files, remove unused JS (many WordPress themes/plugins add scripts that you might not actually need on every page tools like Asset Cleanup or Perfmatters can help remove those). By reducing JS payload, you improve your site’s responsiveness and speed, which both users and search engines appreciate.
How Googlebot handles JS-heavy WordPress sites?
Usually, WordPress sites aren’t single-page applications, so Googlebot will get the full HTML and then load resources. It will fetch your combined/minified JS files (if using WP Rocket, for example, you might have a single combined JS or a few files). Google will execute them after a crawl delay. Google’s “Evergreen” bot (since 2019) uses a recent Chromium, meaning it can handle modern JS features. So features like interactive menus, lazy-loaded content, etc., are generally processed. Google even fakes being idle to let JS finish (as an aside, Googlebot will wait briefly for network calls triggered by JS) – they try to mirror a real browser. So, for SEO content, as long as your content is there either in HTML or produced by JS quickly, Google will see it. In short: Having a lot of JavaScript (like GTM and others) does not inherently hurt your SEO, but it can impact speed and crawling efficiency, which indirectly can influence rankings. The best practice is to include the scripts you need, but keep them optimized. Google’s own guidance sums it up well: “If your website uses a lot of JavaScript, Google will likely understand it. But although Google can handle JavaScript better now, having a fast-loading site is still important so try not to overdo it” (searchenginejournal.com).
5. Crawl Scenarios & SEO/Ranking Consequences
The way Googlebot allocates its crawl requests across your site’s resources can sometimes shed light on issues. Different crawl scenarios (i.e., different patterns in what Googlebot is fetching) can have various SEO implications:
Scenario A: Most crawl requests are HTML (pages) with a healthy mix of assets
This is ideal. It means Google is primarily crawling your content pages (which is what gets indexed and ranked) and also fetching the necessary supporting files (CSS, JS, images) in reasonable proportions. This scenario typically implies your site is crawl-efficient: Google isn’t distracted by irrelevant files or endless redirects/errors. SEO impact: Positive – Googlebot can regularly fetch and index your pages, and it has enough “budget” to periodically re-crawl them for updates. Rankings benefit because your content is being seen and refreshed by Google often.
Scenario B: Excessively high image crawl vs HTML
If you see an outsized percentage of image requests (say, a huge number of images compared to HTML pages), it could mean Googlebot is spending a lot of time crawling image files. This often happens on media-heavy sites or when there are many image URLs (including those generated by plugins or attachment pages). SEO impact: Images themselves can generate traffic via Google Images, but if they consume too much crawl budget, Google might slow down on page crawling. Large images can also slow your site’s load, affecting user experience. Make sure images are optimized (compressed, next-gen formats, properly dimensioned). Also, if WordPress is creating separate “attachment” pages for each image (which is basically thin content pages), consider disabling those or redirecting them – they add to crawl load without much SEO value. The crawl stats don’t directly show that nuance, but a high image count with equal HTML count might hint at it. Overall, lots of images isn’t “bad” if it’s inherent to your site, but manage it by: lazy-loading below-the-fold images, using CDN, and ensuring important content isn’t overshadowed. Google will still crawl and index your pages, but if your server is strained by image requests or Google hits rate limits, page crawling might slow down. On a fast server, this may not be an issue unless you truly have thousands of images. Keep an eye on the total download size in Crawl Stats too if images make that huge, it could hurt crawl efficiency.
Scenario C: Excessively high CSS/JS crawl vs HTML
This scenario might occur if your site has tons of separate CSS/JS files (often from many plugins or unoptimized theme). For instance, prior to optimization your crawl stats showed 52% CSS – meaning over half of Google’s requests were style files, not actual pages. That indicates a potential inefficiency: Googlebot had to retrieve many CSS files (possibly multiple per page) whenever it crawled. SEO impact: While Google doesn’t rank you lower for that, it means crawl budget is not being used optimally. In extreme cases on very large sites, it could mean Googlebot hits its limit crawling CSS and delays crawling new pages or updates. It also might reflect a slower rendering process (lots of render-blocking files). The fix is what you did – inline critical CSS, combine files, etc., to reduce the number of separate CSS/JS fetches. After such fixes, you see CSS down to 13% – Google is now fetching far fewer files. That frees up crawl time for other content. There’s essentially no negative ranking consequence to having CSS/JS percentage drop it’s positive. The only time you worry is if Google can’t get your CSS/JS (e.g., if blocked by robots.txt). Blocking those can cause Google to misunderstand your layout or even miss content generated by JS, which can hurt indexing. So the scenario to avoid is “Google’s not crawling CSS/JS at all due to disallow” that was an old mistake some site owners made. Under mobile-first indexing, blocking CSS/JS is highly discouraged, because Google’s smartphone bot wants to render the page fully like a user would.
Scenario D: Lots of “Other” file types (fonts, videos, JSON, etc.)
“Other” might include API endpoints, font files, or odd file types. If this is high, you’d investigate what those are. Often it’s fonts (as noted, Google counts fonts under “other” in many cases) (searchengineland.com). A lot of font crawling is usually fine (just ensure you aren’t referencing tons of unused webfonts). If it’s JSON or API calls (maybe from an embedded widget), consider if those calls are necessary for Google. Sometimes pages pull data from APIs that Google might try to fetch; if those return large data or are slow, it could bog down rendering. SEO-wise, if the data is needed to display content, Google will wait for it; if not, it’s just extra load. Ensure any important data isn’t locked behind requiring Google to fetch a separate API that might be blocked or slow. For videos or PDFs (other file types in crawl), a high percentage might mean Google is spending time fetching those. That’s okay if you want them indexed (PDF indexing, video thumbnails, etc.), but if not, you could consider robots.txt or noindex on those to reduce crawl waste.
Scenario E: Low crawl activity overall
Another scenario is not about distribution, but the total crawl count. If your site has hundreds of pages but Google is only crawling a few per day, something might be off (crawl budget issue, or Google not interested due to low quality or being new). In your case, the question is more about distribution, but it’s worth noting: crawl frequency matters. Different patterns like a sudden drop in HTML crawling could indicate Google found fewer updates or had trouble accessing the site (server issues). Always correlate crawl stats with site changes or issues.
Consequences in terms of SEO and ranking
The main consequence of inefficient crawling is delayed or incomplete indexing. If Googlebot wastes its crawl budget on unnecessary files or pages, it might slow down indexing of your important content (conductor.com). Google has said if you waste crawl budget, search engines won’t crawl efficiently and it can hurt SEO performance. For most small-to-medium sites, crawl budget isn’t a huge limiting factor, but for larger ones it can be. In practical terms: a page won’t rank if it’s not crawled and indexed. So you want Google to crawl new and updated pages promptly, rather than burning time on, say, 1000 font file requests. By optimizing your resource loading (as you are doing), you ensure Google’s crawl requests are “productive” – mostly hitting your content URLs and the minimal needed support files.
Another angle: If Google encounters performance issues while crawling (very slow responses due to heavy scripts, etc.), it may crawl less. Google dynamically adjusts crawl rate based on your server’s health (if responses slow or errors increase, Googlebot backs off). So a scenario where your site is super slow (perhaps due to loads of unoptimized JS/CSS) could indirectly cause Google to crawl less frequently (to avoid crashing your server). That means slower updates in the index and potential ranking stagnation. By keeping your site fast and lightweight, you invite Google to crawl more.
Also, mobile-first indexing means Google predominantly uses the mobile user-agent to crawl. If your mobile site is identical in content but maybe has fewer heavy elements, that could influence what gets fetched. Ideally, your mobile and desktop are the same URLs (responsive design, as with Astra theme). Just ensure that no resources are accidentally blocked on mobile version (sometimes people hide or remove certain scripts/styles on mobile – as long as they’re not needed, that’s fine). The key is content parity and accessibility.
In summary, the consequences of different crawl patterns boil down to crawl efficiency and page performance: a skewed crawl profile (too much JS, etc.) signals potential performance issues which can impact Core Web Vitals and thus slight ranking factors. It can also hint at wasted crawl budget which, for bigger sites, can mean slower indexing of new content. The ideal scenario is balanced – Google spends most of its time retrieving your pages and the content that matters for indexing, and less time on trivial or repetitive files. By analyzing Crawl Stats, you can spot if something odd is happening (for example, if Google suddenly started crawling a ton of “other” files – maybe an API gone wild – you’d want to fix that to not divert Googlebot). Always fix underlying issues (e.g. lots of 301 redirects or error pages can also waste crawls, though that’s a separate part of crawl stats). The end impact on rankings comes from whether Google can timely index your content and whether your site delivers a good user experience (speed, stability) once users arrive.
Recommendations for Optimizing a WordPress Site (WP Rocket, Astra, etc.)
Based on the above findings, here are concrete recommendations for your WordPress site to ensure Googlebot crawl efficiency, good Core Web Vitals, and overall SEO health:
Continue optimizing CSS delivery: Inlining critical CSS has clearly reduced Google’s separate CSS fetches and improved your load times. Keep the critical CSS inline (WP Rocket’s “Optimize CSS Delivery” does this), and load any additional CSS asynchronously or in one smaller file. Monitor that your HTML size remains reasonable. Avoid inlining huge chunks of non-critical CSS on every page, as it can add up. The goal is achieved: minimal external CSS requests without bloating pages. Your current 13% CSS crawl is fine.
Minify and combine JS/CSS files: Ensure WP Rocket is set to minify and concatenate files where possible. Fewer, smaller files mean fewer requests for Googlebot and faster loads for users. Be cautious combining too many JS files if it causes breakage, but generally WP Rocket handles it well. Also enable “load JS deferred” or “delay JS execution” for non-critical scripts. This will postpone things like analytics and ads until after user interaction or after content load, which improves perceived speed and keeps Googlebot focused on primary content first.
Limit third-party and unused scripts: Audit what scripts and plugins are running. If you have Google Tag Manager, regularly review the tags inside it – remove any trackers or pixels that are not truly needed. Every script has a cost. Likewise, use plugins like Asset CleanUp or Perfmatters to disable plugin scripts/style on pages where they aren’t used. For example, if a contact form plugin loads JS site-wide but you only need it on the contact page, disable it elsewhere. This reduces overall JS bulk. It not only helps performance but also means Googlebot has fewer URLs to fetch for scripts. This is in line with the principle “keep it simple, don’t overdo JS” (searchenginejournal.com).
Use WP Rocket’s Heartbeat control: As discussed, the Heartbeat API can be limited. In WP Rocket settings, under Heartbeat, set it to “Reduce activity” or disable on frontend entirely. This prevents unnecessary AJAX calls that don’t benefit crawlers or users. It will lighten the load on your server, improving response times (Googlebot will notice faster responses). Just ensure you don’t disable it in the admin where it’s needed for auto-saves. Frontend usually can be safely turned off (savvy.co.il). This way, even if Googlebot were to execute some JS, it won’t trigger continuous admin-ajax calls.
Optimize fonts and other assets: Since you use Astra, consider using the built-in options to optimize Google Fonts or icon fonts. Astra allows local hosting of fonts or using system fonts. If you’re loading a custom Astra font .woff, make sure it’s being cached and perhaps consider preloading it for better performance. It’s good that Google can crawl it; now make sure it loads efficiently. Use font-display: swap in your CSS so that if the font is delayed, it doesn’t hold up text rendering (avoiding FOIT). These tweaks improve your CLS metric. From an SEO standpoint, these are minor, but every bit helps for CWV.
Image optimization: Although not explicitly asked, images are often a big part of WordPress sites. Use WP Rocket’s LazyLoad for images (so below-the-fold images aren’t immediately fetched by Googlebot or the browser). Serve modern formats like WebP if possible (WP Rocket has integration for WebP or you can use a plugin). Comprehensively compress images. This reduces the “Images” share in crawl stats in terms of bytes, if not requests. A lighter page means Googlebot can fetch it faster and maybe crawl more pages in the same timeframe.
Ensure important resources are crawlable: Double-check your robots.txt to make sure you’re not disallowing anything critical. By default, WordPress doesn’t block CSS/JS (it used to block some directories years ago). Make sure /wp-content/uploads/, /wp-includes/ are not disallowed, since they contain your theme assets and images. You want Googlebot to fetch CSS, JS, and images to fully render pages (siteguru.co). It sounds like Google is crawling them (since you see stats), so that’s good. Just maintain that openness.
Monitor Crawl Stats & Logs: Keep an eye on the Crawl Stats report in GSC after your optimizations. You should see HTML remaining high, and hopefully an overall decrease in total requests if you removed a lot of extraneous calls. Also monitor the “crawl frequency” and “average response time” graphs. With WP Rocket caching, your average response time to Google should be low (fast), which is great. If you ever see spikes in other file types or errors, investigate promptly (could be a plugin gone rogue or a new resource being added).
Core Web Vitals focus: Continue leveraging optimizations to hit good CWV scores (Largest Contentful Paint, Cumulative Layout Shift, Interaction to Next Paint/FID). You already tackled CSS (helps LCP) and limiting JS (helps FID/INP). Also consider: set explicit dimensions for images or embeds to avoid layout shift (Astra likely handles this, but check any custom HTML). Use WP Rocket’s “Delay JS execution” for things like GTM, ad scripts – this can dramatically improve Time to Interactive. Keep mobile performance in mind: test your site on a mobile network speed to see if any script or asset is slowing it down and address that. While CWV is a lightweight ranking factor, Google has confirmed that a site with consistently poor CWV will get less organic traffic than one with good scores (all else equal) (debugbear.com). So, your ongoing efforts here can provide a slight ranking edge and better user engagement.
Content and internal linking: Remember that crawl optimization supports your SEO, but content is still king. Make sure as you optimize technical aspects, you also have a solid content strategy and internal linking. Googlebot will crawl efficiently, but it also needs to find new pages – so have a clear linking structure or sitemap so Google discovers everything. With mobile-first indexing, ensure your mobile menu or links are not hiding important sections (if something is only accessible on desktop, fix that).
Regularly update and purge caches appropriately: Using WP Rocket means pages are cached as static HTML for speed. When you make content updates, ensure the cache is cleared for those pages so Googlebot gets the fresh content on next crawl. This isn’t a big issue, but just part of maintenance. A fast cache hit will give Google a HTTP 200 and the content almost instantly, which could encourage Google to crawl a bit more aggressively (since your server can handle it easily).
By implementing these recommendations, you align with general SEO best practices and specifically address mobile-first indexing (by improving mobile speed and not blocking resources), Core Web Vitals (by optimizing load and interaction times), and crawl budget optimization (by reducing redundant resource fetches and focusing Googlebot on important content). The end result should be a WordPress site that loads lightning-fast for users, gives Googlebot exactly what it needs (and no more), and thereby supports better indexing and rankings.
Sources:
Google Search Console Crawl Stats documentation and SEO analyses: siteguru.co, searchengineland.com
Performance insights on inlining CSS and render-blocking resources: nitropack.io
WordPress optimization guides for Heartbeat and asset loading: savvy.co.il
Google statements on JavaScript indexing and site speed importance: searchenginejournal.com
Crawl budget and page experience considerations for SEO: conductor.com, debugbear.com