HSHighSEOToolsMobile Friendly TestFree SEO and website audit tools
Website Management Tools

Mobile-Friendly Test

Enter a URL and this test inspects the page markup and linked CSS for responsive signals — a viewport meta tag, fluid layout rules, responsive media handling, and fixed-width clues — then combines them into a 0–100 readiness score.

Website Management ToolsServer-backed/mobile-friendly-test

Fetches the page and its linked CSS, then scores mobile readiness — viewport, responsive CSS, media, fixed-width clues, and touch controls. (Google retired its own Mobile-Friendly Test in 2023.)

Step by step

How to use the Mobile Friendly Test

  1. Enter the page URL in the Page URL field.
  2. Click Test mobile-friendliness to fetch the HTML and linked CSS.
  3. Read the score/100, verdict, viewport status, and CSS analyzed counts.
  4. Review the Signals table and Suggested fixes for each weak factor.
How to use the Mobile Friendly Test — tool screenshot
The Mobile Friendly Test on HighSEOTools

Pro tip: A missing viewport meta tag costs the most points, so fix that first before tuning responsive CSS.

The signals it weighs

Seven structural signals feed the score, each worth a fixed share of the 100 points. The viewport meta tag carries the most weight because without it a mobile browser will not scale the layout correctly. Responsive CSS is judged from inline styles and up to six linked stylesheets, looking for media queries, container queries, fluid width rules, flex/grid patterns, and framework breakpoint clues. The fixed-width check hunts for large pixel widths declared inline, in linked CSS, or as attributes that tend to break narrow screens.

The remaining points cover heavy iframe embeds, wide table layouts, and the presence of touch-target controls such as inputs and buttons. Each signal is graded Strong, Partial, or Missing, and any signal short of full marks generates a matching suggestion.

How the verdict is set

Points from all seven signals are summed and clamped to a 0–100 range. A total of 80 or more is labelled Mobile-friendly, 55 to 79 is Needs improvement, and anything below 55 is Not mobile-friendly. Because the viewport tag and responsive CSS together account for a large slice of the score, a page that omits both will struggle to clear the top band even if everything else looks fine.

A heuristic, not Google's test

This is a markup-based estimate. It does not render the page, simulate a phone, or measure tap-target spacing in pixels the way a real device would. Google retired its own Mobile-Friendly Test tool and its API in late 2023, so this is not that tool and the score will not match it. Read the result as a fast structural sanity check: it tells you whether the responsive scaffolding is present in the HTML, not whether the rendered experience is flawless.

The point weights at a glance

  • Viewport meta tag — up to 20 points, the single biggest factor.
  • Responsive CSS — up to 18 points for media queries, container queries, fluid sizing, flex/grid patterns, or framework breakpoint clues.
  • Responsive media — up to 16 points for srcset, picture elements, fluid media CSS, or pages that have no image tags to resize.
  • Fixed-width clues — up to 16 points, awarded for the absence of large fixed pixel widths.
  • Heavy embeds, wide tables, and touch controls — up to 10 points each.

Tips for a higher, fairer score

If you only fix one thing, add a viewport meta tag — it is worth twenty points and is the most common reason a page lands in the not-friendly band. Make sure your responsive CSS is in normal inline styles or linked stylesheets the scanner can read, and use media queries, container queries, fluid widths, or flex/grid rules so the responsive-CSS signal scores fairly. Convert important images to srcset or picture markup, or keep them fluid with CSS, and audit your HTML and CSS for fixed widths of 800 pixels or more. Because tables and iframes each cost points, wrap wide tables in an overflow container and load only the embeds a mobile reader truly needs.

When the score can mislead

  • A page can score well yet still feel cramped if its CSS sizing is poor in ways the markup does not reveal.
  • Sites that build layout entirely in JavaScript may under-score because the responsive hints are not in the initial HTML.
  • A single decorative iframe or wide table costs points even when it is handled gracefully by the actual stylesheet.
  • Responsive rules loaded from blocked, very large, or more deeply nested CSS files may not be counted, so a genuinely responsive page can still look weaker than it is.

Common mistakes to avoid

  • Adding a viewport tag but leaving fixed pixel widths in place — both signals matter, and the widths will still drag the score down.
  • Letting important images overflow their containers instead of using srcset, picture, or fluid image CSS.
  • Treating the verdict as Google's official mobile usability status, which it is not.
  • Chasing a perfect 100 by stripping out a necessary table or embed instead of handling it responsively.

A heuristic, not Google's test

This is a markup-based estimate. It does not render the page, simulate a phone, or measure tap-target spacing in pixels the way a real device would. Google retired its own Mobile-Friendly Test tool and its API in late 2023, so this is not that tool and the score will not match it. Read the result as a fast structural sanity check: it tells you whether the responsive scaffolding is present in the HTML, not whether the rendered experience is flawless. For the real-world picture, view the page on an actual phone and check mobile Core Web Vitals with the Page Speed Test.

Privacy note

You provide only a URL. The page is fetched once from our edge and its markup is scanned to produce the score; nothing about the page is stored. Because the request is anonymous and unauthenticated, only publicly reachable pages can be tested.

Worked examples

Passes, partials, and failures

Viewport present, no responsive CSS

Input: https://example.com

Output: Mobile score 78/100 · Verdict Needs improvement · Viewport Yes · Media queries 0 · Fixed-width clues 0 · CSS analyzed 0/0. Signals: Viewport tag 20/20 (Present), Responsive CSS 0/18 (0 media queries, 0 container queries, 0 layout hints), Responsive media 16/16 (no image tags detected), Fixed-width clues 16/16, Heavy embeds 10/10, Table layout 10/10, Touch controls 6/10 (1 interactive control).

Measured 2026-07-17. This is a useful honesty check on the heuristic: example.com reads perfectly well on a phone, but because it declares no media queries or fluid rules it forfeits all 18 responsive-CSS points and lands in the middle band.

A responsive article with wide tables

Input: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization

Output: Mobile score 84/100 · Verdict Mobile-friendly · Viewport Yes · Media queries 13 · Fixed-width clues 2 · CSS analyzed 2/2. Signals: Viewport tag 20/20, Responsive CSS 18/18 (13 media queries, 9 layout hints), Responsive media 16/16 (13 markup hints, 1 CSS hint), Fixed-width clues 8/16 (2 clues), Heavy embeds 10/10, Table layout 2/10 (7 tables), Touch controls 10/10 (725 interactive controls).

Measured 2026-07-17; scores shift if the site's markup or CSS changes. The seven tables cost eight of the ten table-layout points even though the page handles them responsively — a live example of the deduction being a prompt to confirm, not a real fault.

A strongly responsive page

Input: https://www.iana.org/help/example-domains

Output: Mobile score 88/100 · Verdict Mobile-friendly · Viewport Yes · Media queries 65 · Fixed-width clues 1 · CSS analyzed 1/1. Signals: Viewport tag 20/20, Responsive CSS 18/18 (65 media queries, 20+ layout hints), Responsive media 16/16 (0 markup hints, 15 CSS hints), Fixed-width clues 8/16 (1 clue), Heavy embeds 10/10, Table layout 6/10 (1 table), Touch controls 10/10 (28 interactive controls).

Measured 2026-07-17. Responsive media earns full marks from CSS rules alone here — no srcset or picture markup is present, which is exactly the case the "or fluid media CSS" branch is meant to credit.

FAQ

Questions we get about Mobile Friendly Test

Will this match Google's mobile usability result?

Not necessarily. Google's standalone Mobile-Friendly Test was discontinued in 2023, and this tool uses its own markup heuristic. Use it as a quick structural check rather than an official verdict.

Why did my page score low when it looks fine on my phone?

The test reads the initial HTML. If your responsive behaviour comes from JavaScript or from CSS the scanner cannot fully evaluate, the structural signals it looks for may be absent even though the rendered page works.

Does the viewport tag really matter that much?

Yes. It is the single highest-weighted signal because without a viewport meta tag mobile browsers fall back to a desktop-width layout, which is the most common cause of a non-friendly result.

What counts as a responsive image here?

The checker looks for srcset, picture elements, or CSS rules that keep image and media elements fluid. Pages with no image tags are not penalized for missing responsive image markup.

How are the verdict bands decided?

The seven signals are summed and clamped to 0–100. A total of 80 or more is Mobile-friendly, 55 to 79 is Needs improvement, and anything below 55 is Not mobile-friendly.

Why was I penalised for a single table or iframe?

Tables and iframes can break narrow layouts or pull in heavy payloads, so each one beyond zero reduces those signals. If yours is handled responsively, treat the deduction as a prompt to confirm that rather than a real fault.

Site standards

How HighSEOTools handles data and methodology

I document how each check works, where its data comes from, and which parts are only estimates.

Editorial standardsAboutContact