Performance is an engineering discipline, not a checklist
Static-site generation is one tool among many. The real question is: where does your site sit on the spectrum from "purely static HTML" to "real-time SSR with user-personalized data"? I help you pick, and then build for it properly.
For most marketing sites, static or incremental static regeneration on the edge wins. For dashboards and apps, server components and streaming. For content with frequent updates, ISR with on-demand revalidation. The right answer is specific to your traffic shape, content cadence, and team, and I make those calls explicit, not implicit.
What I deliver
- Pre-rendered HTML on every static-eligible route. Load-to-interactive in milliseconds
- Edge rendering for personalized or geo-aware content with sub-100ms TTFB
- Incremental Static Regeneration (ISR) with on-demand purging tied to your CMS webhooks
- Core Web Vitals budgets enforced in CI. PRs that regress LCP, CLS, or INP get flagged
- Image pipeline: AVIF/WebP, responsive sizes, lazy loading, blur placeholders
- Font loading optimized. Preloaded, swap behavior, no FOIT
- Third-party script audit and partytown-style offloading where appropriate
- Real-user monitoring (RUM) wired to a dashboard you'll actually look at
The performance stack
Where this pays off
Marketing sites that need to convert
Every 100ms of LCP improvement is a measurable conversion lift on PPC landing pages. I've done this audit at scale across 10+ domains.
SEO-driven content sites
Google ranks fast pages higher and INP is a Core Web Vitals factor as of 2024. Performance is SEO, not adjacent to it.
Global audiences
Edge rendering brings your site within ~50ms of users in Singapore, São Paulo, and Sydney. Without the cost of multi-region origins.
Cost-conscious infrastructure
Static + edge generally costs a fraction of always-on Node origins. The performance win is also a cloud bill win.
Frequently asked
What are realistic Core Web Vitals targets?
LCP under 1.8s, CLS at 0.00, INP under 150ms. Measured at the 75th percentile in real-user data, not just lab tests. These targets are achievable for most marketing sites with the right architecture. If yours can't hit them, there's a fixable reason.
Is static site generation right for my site?
If content changes a few times a day or less and isn't user-specific, yes, static is almost always the right answer. For frequent updates, ISR with on-demand revalidation. For personalized or authenticated content, edge SSR. I make this call as part of scoping, not after the fact.
Can you audit an existing site without rebuilding it?
Yes. A typical audit runs 2 to 3 days and produces a prioritized remediation plan with effort estimates per item. Most clients implement the audit recommendations themselves; some hire me to implement the top wins.
Will switching to static break my CMS workflow?
It changes it. Most modern headless CMS platforms (Storyblok, Sanity, Contentful) trigger webhooks on publish that revalidate the affected pages. Editors see new content live within 30 seconds, without the dev team in the loop.