by Terry MacCauley - Posted 1 day ago
There was a time when website performance scores were valuable, even if imperfect. They served as diagnostic tools that helped dealers identify friction, uncover opportunities, and improve the customer experience.
Today, however, a critical line has been crossed.
A troubling trend has emerged in the automotive website sector: dealer websites boasting flawless Google Lighthouse scores while simultaneously blocking or interfering with Lighthouse and other standard inspection tools. Meanwhile, real browsing behavior often tells a very different story.
This is not optimization. It is a presentation. That distinction matters.
On paper, some websites now display 100 percent scores across performance, accessibility, best practices, and SEO. Yet when real shoppers load the site, scroll inventory, engage filters, wait for reviews, or submit forms, the experience can feel noticeably slower or less stable than the score suggests.
Performance metrics should reflect customer experience. When the numbers and the experience diverge, the integrity of the measurement must be questioned.
Google Lighthouse is not a niche or experimental tool. It is built by Google and used daily by developers, agencies, and enterprise teams around the world. Its purpose is to provide standardized, repeatable insight into website performance.
If Lighthouse is blocked or interfered with, a reasonable question follows: why would a truly high-performing site resist independent inspection?
Blocking diagnostic tools does not improve performance. It reduces transparency and limits a dealer’s ability to verify the claims being made about their own website.
A website that performs well should perform well under scrutiny.
Many of these situations involve legitimate performance tools such as WP Rocket and other caching or optimization plugins. These tools are not inherently unethical. When configured responsibly, they can improve speed and efficiency.
The issue lies in how they are used and how the results are represented.
Plugins like WP Rocket allow for:
JavaScript deferral and delayed execution
Lazy loading of assets
Aggressive page caching
Conditional loading of scripts
Pre-rendered or preloaded content delivery
These controls directly influence what loads during the first few seconds of a page visit, which is precisely the window Lighthouse measures most heavily.
By delaying JavaScript execution, a site can appear extremely light during an audit. Lighthouse records strong metrics because it observes the page before heavier scripts execute. Shortly afterward, the scripts that power chat tools, review widgets, analytics platforms, and tracking systems may still load for real users. The performance cost simply occurs outside the measurement window.
Aggressive caching can create another distortion. Lighthouse may run against a cached version of the page that does not represent a first-time visitor experience. Real shoppers typically arrive without pre-cached assets, yet performance reports may reflect idealized conditions.
These configurations do not technically “fake” scores. However, they can create an environment in which Lighthouse sees a simplified version of the site that does not fully reflect the everyday user experience.
When vendors go further and interfere with inspection tools themselves, the issue moves beyond optimization and into misrepresentation.
Dealers should feel confident asking:
Why does Google Lighthouse not operate normally on my site?
Do audit tools see the exact same version of the site that customers see?
Which scripts are delayed, and when do they load?
Are performance scores based on cold, uncached sessions or ideal repeat visits?
The most important question remains simple:
If nothing were hidden, delayed, or restricted, would the website still tell the same performance story?
A transparent partner should welcome those questions.
This trend does not advance automotive retail. It undermines it.
Dealers already navigate a complex landscape of vendors, platforms, and performance metrics. When performance tools become marketing props instead of diagnostic instruments, dealers lose clarity and confidence in their decision-making.
Performance theater does not increase sales or reduce bounce rates. It creates a temporary sense of reassurance that eventually collides with real-world behavior.
Trust rarely erodes through honest failure. It erodes through misrepresentation.
Website performance data should be verifiable, not accepted on blind faith. Dealers deserve the ability to run standard tools without interference and to see results that align with actual customer experience.
A competent vendor will welcome that level of transparency. They will clearly explain how performance is measured, what is optimized, and what trade-offs exist. They will not prioritize perfect screenshots over measurable shopper impact.
High scores are not the goal. Honest performance is.
Dealers are not purchasing scores, plugins, or reports. They are investing in confidence that their website is working for them rather than against them. Transparency is not a feature; it is the foundation of any genuine partnership. When performance data can be inspected, questioned, and independently verified, everyone benefits. When it cannot, trust erodes quickly. The future of automotive retail will not be defined by who can produce the cleanest audit screenshot, but by who is willing to stand behind what customers actually experience. That is the standard we choose to uphold, and it is the standard every dealer should expect.
- by Terry MacCauley, Founder & CEO
Handle Objections Like a Pro
Too many salespeople talk rather than listen. They miss golden opportunities because they’re not asking the right questions. In this video, Jeremy breaks down how to dig deeper, uncover real pain points, and naturally guide prospects toward your solution.
