Landing Pages, Lead Generation, and SEO: How Hosting Can Be Improved. The Stratego Swat Case Study

Introduction

As professionals of theperformance hosting and advanced systems engineering, for some time now we have been witnessing a phenomenon as curious as it is worrying: the interest towards website performance seems to have drastically weakened, even among insiders. Except for the most striking cases - those in which a page takes as much as five seconds to load - in the most "refined" situations it almost seems that a second more or less makes no difference.

If this attitude may appear normal in a common user or in someone who does not have technical skills, it becomes an alarm bell when those who think like this are web agencies, developers and freelancers, which, while adopting discrete solutions, often give up on the truly optimal ones. The issue becomes even more serious when such compromises concern the landing pages on which tens of thousands of euros are invested in advertising campaigns: here even a delay of a few milliseconds can translate into a concrete loss of contacts and sales.

With this article we want to show, in a technical and impartial, as many agencies today are following a path that is by no means the best among those available. We will do this by taking as a case study Stratego Swat, a renowned and recognized reality online, aware that it does not represent an exception in the Italian panorama, but rather a rule: that of underestimating a crucial factor such ashosting.

Who is Stratego Swat?

Stratego Swat is an agency based in the Republic of San Marino, composed of approximately thirty professionals active in various areas of marketing, communications, and digital business. On their official website (strategoswat.com), they present themselves as a team capable of supporting companies and professionals in online growth, offering integrated solutions ranging from strategic consultancy to operational campaign management.

One of the hallmarks of Stratego Swat is their strong widespread online presence: they are extremely active on the main social networks and their targeted advertising on Instagram It is particularly frequent and highly recognizable, so much so that it has become a defining element of their communication. This visibility is not accidental, but the result of a clear and consistent approach guided directly by the founder, Giampaolo Antonante, which gave the brand a strong and highly recognisable tone.

The agency's declared approach is that of a heterogeneous team, in which graphic designers, copywriters, social media managers, advertising experts, web developers and strategic consultants They work together in synergy. This multidisciplinary approach is undoubtedly a strength: it allows them to monitor every stage of the marketing funnel, from traffic generation to lead and customer conversion, ensuring comprehensive and structured management of digital activities.

Landing pages in the business model

Among the flagship services offered by Stratego Swat we find the landing page, to which the agency dedicates a specific section of the site: “Let's Make Landing Pages”.

But what exactly is a landing page? It's not just a simple web page or an extension of an institutional website. A landing page is a landing page designed with a single goal: transforming the visitor into a lead or customer. It's designed to eliminate any distractions and guide the user along a clear path, culminating in a specific action: filling out a contact form, purchasing a product, booking a service, or subscribing to a newsletter.

Stratego Swat's philosophy is clear: the landing page is a key component of a broader marketing machine. It doesn't exist as a standalone entity, but as a destination for traffic generated by advertising campaigns and communication activities. Facebook Ads, Google Ads (formerly Adsense) and other similar platforms are used by the agency to drive a steady stream of visitors to these conversion-focused pages.

In their communication, Stratego Swat strongly highlights how the landing page should not be confused with a showcase site, which often has informative and generic purposes. The landing page is an asset that lives on measurable goals, where success is calculated in terms of CTR (click-through rate), leads generated, sales and actual bookingsA commendable vision and perfectly in line with the best practices of digital marketing, as it pushes us to consider each project not as a simple graphic exercise, but as a real return-on-investment (ROI)-oriented business tool.

A critical point: the technical part and hosting

While acknowledging the value of advertising strategies and the effectiveness of landing pages as a lead generation tool, one aspect emerges that, in our opinion, could be substantially improved: taking care of the technical infrastructure and web performance related to hosting.

Landing pages are in fact "high intensity" tools: they must be fast, light, immediate. It's not just about design or copywriting, but about overall performance which Google has been evaluating for some time through specific parameters such as Coreweb Vitals (Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, Cumulative Layout Shift).

These indicators, made known by Google as SEO ranking factors, are no longer a technical detail, but represent a crucial element that influences:

• Il organic positioning in the SERPs;

• Il cost of Ads campaigns (since a slow landing page increases the CPC and worsens the Quality Score);

• Le direct conversions, as several independent studies have shown how an improvement of a few tenths of a second in loading speed can reduce abandonment rates and increase conversion rates.

Customer perception and technical reality

It must be said that, according to the testimonials published by Stratego Swat on their website and social media channels, clients are consistently very satisfied with the results achieved. The reviews highlight the support received, the impact of the advertising campaigns, and the effectiveness of the landing pages in terms of graphics, copywriting, and persuasive messaging. There's therefore no reason to doubt the quality of the work done on the creative and strategic fronts.

However, it is equally true that the end customer hardly has the tools to analyze what happens "behind the scenes": he does not evaluate the quality of the hosting, the loading speed on mobile or desktop, nor the compliance with the parameters of the Coreweb VitalsWhat they perceive above all is the immediate impact: the number of leads generated, the increase in contact requests, the performance of the campaign compared to the investments made.

Let's take a practical example:

• A client sees 100 contacts coming in from a Facebook campaign in a week and considers the result positive.

• What he doesn't know is that if the landing page had faster loading times and better PageSpeed ​​Insights scores, those same 100 contacts could have been 110 or 120, simply because some of the users wouldn't have abandoned the page while it was loading.

This generates a sort of information asymmetry: the client focuses on the immediate result (generated leads), while Google and analytics tools highlight inefficiencies that, if resolved, would have a direct impact on both conversions and SEO.

It is precisely in this perceptual distance that a large margin for improvement lies. If an agency like Stratego Swat were to combine its already well-structured marketing efforts with an infrastructure performance-optimized hosting, customers would have a double advantage:

1. Better results from paid campaigns, thanks to faster landing pages that reduce abandonment rates and improve ad Quality Score.

2. Long-term organic growth, because Google rewards pages that offer a superior user experience and meet the Core Web Vitals parameters.

In other words, it would not only be a matter of providing “beautiful and convincing” landing pages on which to invest significant advertising budgets, but also technically flawless, capable of transforming momentary satisfaction into a lasting competitive advantage, thanks also to the better ranking and positioning that a site that meets Google requirements can achieve and guarantee even in strategies in which latent demand is intercepted (i.e., direct demand in search engines), without necessarily being dependent on push strategies that require constant and continuous investment in display advertising and campaigns.

Why hosting makes the difference

Hosting isn't just a "container" for a landing page: it's the foundation that determines whether the user will have a seamless experience and whether the marketing campaign will achieve the desired results. A page built with the best design and persuasive copywriting risks failing if the server is slow., if the configuration is not optimized or if an adequate caching layer is missing.

It is true that in ideal contexts — such as a connection optical fiber stable or a Latest generation 5G —some gaps may be less noticeable. However, the daily reality of many users is different. Let's think about a connection radio like those offered by operators like EOLO in Italy: on rainy or cloudy days, signal quality drops dramatically, and even a site with non-optimized loads becomes difficult to use. The same happens with connections Intermittent 4G, frequent in rural areas of the Apennines or on the islands, with the Sardinia As a prime example, in these scenarios, every technical inefficiency is amplified: a slow server or a poorly optimized page can become an insurmountable obstacle.

From the point of view of Google and for users, a slow page equals a bad experience, and the data speaks for itself:

• Il 53% of mobile users abandon a site that takes more than 3 seconds to load (source: Google).

• Just one extra second in loading time can reduce conversions by up to 20%.

• Improving technical performance means more trust, greater interaction, and a better return on investment.

This is why hosting is not a technical detail for engineers, but a strategic business choiceA fast, scalable, and resilient infrastructure not only reduces the cost per conversion in advertising campaigns and improves SEO rankings, but also ensures a consistent experience regardless of connectivity conditions. In other words, it makes the page reliable not only for those browsing from Milan with 1 Gbps fiber, but also for those connecting from a small Apennine village with an inconsistent mobile connection.

Practical analysis: the tested sites

To better understand the modus operandi of Stratego Swat and evaluate the impact of the technical choices adopted, we decided to carry out some concrete measurements on some of the most representative sites that bear their signature. The aim is not to question the quality of the marketing strategies adopted - which, as we have seen, are appreciated by customers and well-structured - but rather to highlight a technical thread, related to web performance and hosting infrastructure.

In particular, we analyzed the following projects:

• The official website of Stratego Swat: www.strategoswat.com

• The site of LAW 3, a leading company dedicated to over-indebtedness solutions: www.legge3.it

• The site of Sharknet, specialized in mosquito nets and protection systems: www.shark-net.com

• The site of Alter Training, which offers professional training courses: www.alterformazione.it

• The site of Ethical Gold, a company active in the goldsmith and jewelry sector: www.oroetic.it

These sites represent a significant sample of the agency's digital output, both for the variety of sectors involved (training, design, legal consulting, consumer goods, luxury goods) and for the online visibility they have acquired.

Our analysis focused on some key parameters:

• Loading speed, both on desktop and mobile;

• Coreweb Vitals (Largest Contentful Paint, Interaction to Next Paint, Cumulative Layout Shift);

• Infrastructure stability and consistency (hosting choices, caching, compression, resource management);

• Image optimization aspects that directly impact the performance perceived by the visitor.

This analysis does not aim to judge the contents or creativity of the projects, but rather to verify whether there is a recurring pattern in the technical choices and whether there are concrete margins for improvement in terms of hosting and web performance.

And the preliminary results, as we will see in the continuation of this article, show a clear picture: despite the quality of the campaigns and the careful design of the pages, evident gaps on the technical level. Gaps that, while not immediately compromising the results perceived by customers, could limit the overall potential of landing pages in terms of:

• Technical SEO, with an impact on organic positioning;

• Cost of paid campaigns, due to lower quality scores in Ads;

• User experience and conversion rate, especially in contexts of weak or unstable connectivity.

At the same time, this painting highlights a huge potential for improvementBy adopting high-performance hosting solutions and technical optimization strategies, your return on advertising investment and organic growth could significantly benefit.

Analysis of the first site: Stratego Swat (https://www.strategoswat.com)

Checks performed with tools like Hosting Analyzer and Google PageSpeed ​​Insights provide a pretty clear picture of the current state of the site.

1. Hosting and server configuration

• CMS detected: WordPress

• Web Server: NGINX

• HTTP/2 support: active

• HTTP/3 support: not active

• Compression: No compression is active (neither Gzip, Brotli, nor Zstd). This results in a higher data volume transmitted and therefore slower page loading, especially on less-than-optimal networks.

Il DNS resolution time (11,58 ms) is decent, but the values ​​of Time To First Byte (TTFB) are above the threshold recommended by Google.

• Desktop: ~239 ms

• Mobile: ~220–240 ms

Google indicates how maximum recommended value for TTFB 200 msExceeding this threshold means that the server's initial response is already delayed, and any further page loading phases are penalized.

2. PageSpeed ​​Insights

Google's mobile analysis highlights important critical issues:

• Performances: 28/100 → very low score, red band.

• Accessibility: 72/100 → fair but room for improvement.

• Best practices: 71/100 → reports suboptimal technical implementations.

• SEO: 85/100 → above average, but not excellent.

The mobile performance score is the most critical metric, because most of the traffic today comes from smartphones.

3. Core Web Vitals

There is no real data available for Coreweb Vitals from the Chrome User Experience Report. This happens when the site doesn't generate enough traffic tracked by Google to provide reliable statistics.

However, laboratory simulations suggest that there may be problems on LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) e INP (Interaction to Next Paint), both fundamental parameters for user experience and official ranking factors.

4. General considerations

From an impartial perspective, the points can be summarized as follows:

• The technological basis is valid (WordPress on NGINX), but the configuration is not optimized on the hosting side.

• The lack of compression and exceeding the threshold of 200 ms TTFB recommended by Google these are obvious critical issues.

• The lack of real data on Core Web Vitals prevents a definitive assessment, but tests already indicate inefficiencies that impact SEO and conversions.

5. Practical implications

The site may be usable under fast connection conditions (fiber, stable 5G), but the limitations become very penalizing in less favorable contexts, such as:

• Radio connections (EOLO and similar), which worsen significantly on rainy or cloudy days;

• Unstable mobile coverage (intermittent 4G), frequent in rural or island areas such as Sardinia.

In these scenarios, a TTFB already above 200 ms makes the user experience even slower, increasing the risk of abandonment and reducing the effectiveness of advertising campaigns.

Analysis of the second site: Law 3 (https://www.legge3.it)

Checks using Hosting Analyzer and Google PageSpeed ​​Insights provide a fairly clear picture of the site's performance and technical health.

1. Hosting and server configuration

• CMS detected: WordPress

• Web Server: NGINX

• HTTP/2 support: active

• HTTP/3 support: not active

• CompressionNo compression (Gzip, Brotli, Zstd) is enabled. This increases the overall size of the transferred resources and slows down loading, especially on mobile devices or slow connections.

The values ​​of the Time To First Byte (TTFB) they are very critical:

• Desktop: ~540 ms

• Mobile: ~500–520 ms

These values ​​are more than double the maximum threshold recommended by Google (200 ms)In practice, the server takes too long to return the first response to the browser, negatively impacting all subsequent metrics.

2. PageSpeed ​​Insights and Core web Vitals

Unlike strategoswat.com, this site has real data collected by Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX).

The overall rating is not passed for Core web Vitals, mainly due to too high LCP:

• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP): 4,9 s → well above the recommended threshold of 2,5 s.

• Interaction to Next Paint (INP): 241 ms → acceptable, below the 300 ms threshold.

• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS): 0,02 → excellent, below the 0,1 threshold.

Other relevant metrics:

• First Contentful Paint (FCP): 3,8 s → slow, should stay under 2 s.

• Actual TTFB: 2,2 s → a very high value, which confirms the critical issues that have already emerged.

3. General considerations

From the point of view Super partes we can draw these conclusions:

• The technological basis (WordPress on NGINX) is the same as already seen in other Stratego Swat projects, but not optimized on the server side.

• Lack of compression and high TTFB are among the main bottlenecks.

• Real usage data confirms that the user experience is penalised: a LCP close to 5 seconds on mobile It is unsatisfactory and causes a high dropout rate.

• A good INP and CLS score is not enough to compensate for excessively slow initial rendering and loading times.

4. Practical implications

Un TTFB over 2 seconds and an LCP of almost 5 seconds have direct consequences:

• SEOGoogle considers these values ​​insufficient and uses them as negative ranking signals.

• advertising: Campaign Quality Score can suffer, increasing costs per click and reducing profitability.

• ConversionsThe average mobile user doesn't wait five seconds to see the main content of the page. This results in a high abandonment rate.

In contexts with suboptimal connections (rural areas, Sardinia, unstable 4G, radio links subject to weather), the critical issues become even more marked, amplifying the problem.

It should also be noted that TTFB is always a driving factor, meaning that if the TTFB is high, other parameters will necessarily be high as well. TTFB (Time to First Byte) is the fundamental parameter in web performance architecture as it establishes the starting point for all subsequent page loading and rendering processes. When TTFB is high, it inevitably creates a negative domino effect on all other Core Web Vitals: Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) cannot start until the browser receives the first response byte from the server, First Input Delay (FID) is affected by the delay in executing JavaScript that must be downloaded first, and Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) can worsen due to asynchronous and delayed loading of resources. This happens because the browser follows a rigid sequential process: it must receive the initial HTML, parse it to identify critical resources (CSS, JavaScript, images), and only then can the visual rendering process begin. As a result, Optimizing TTFB becomes the top priority in any web performance strategy, since even marginal improvements in this parameter are amplified positively across the entire loading chain, making it possible to reach the optimal thresholds for all Core Web Vitals.

Analysis of the third site: Sharknet (https://www.shark-net.com)

Analyses using Hosting Analyzer and Google PageSpeed ​​Insights reveal a scenario with some positive aspects, but also significant critical issues from a performance standpoint.

1. Hosting and server configuration

• CMS detected: WordPress

• Web Server: NGINX

• HTTP/2 support: active

• HTTP/3 support: not active

• Compression: Enables Gzip only; Brotli and Zstd are not supported.

Il Time To First Byte (TTFB) is higher than the threshold recommended by Google (200 ms):

• Desktop: ~267 ms

• Mobile: ~260 ms

These values ​​are not as dramatic as those seen on legge3.it, but they remain above the recommended limit, negatively impacting the perceived speed and overall loading efficiency.

2. PageSpeed ​​Insights and Core web Vitals

For shark-net.com are available CrUX real data (Chrome User Experience Report). The overall rating of the Core Web Vitals is not passed.

• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP): 3,0 s → above the 2,5 s limit.

• Interaction to Next Paint (INP): 137 ms → excellent, well below the 200–300 ms threshold.

• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS): 0,0 → excellent, no visible shift.

Other metrics:

• First Contentful Paint (FCP): 2,7 s → at the limit, but acceptable.

• Real TTFB: 2,5 s → very high, well above the recommended value of 0,2 s (200 ms).

3. General considerations

From a technical point of view:

• The use of Gzip is a step up from other sites tested, but more modern compression options (Brotli, Zstd) are missing, which would have further improved performance.

• LCPs above 3 seconds represent a real problem: the main part of the page takes too long to appear, risking user frustration.

• CLS and INP, on the other hand, are excellent, which means that the page, once loaded, is stable and responsive.

4. Practical implications

Un LCP over 3 seconds and an TTFB of 2,5s They make the site less competitive in terms of SEO and conversions. In particular:

• SEOGoogle clearly flags non-compliance with Core Web Vitals. This can impact rankings.

• User experience: on slow networks (radio link, unstable 4G, rural areas) the problem becomes much more noticeable, leading to high abandonment rates.

• Advertising campaignsSlow loading reduces perceived quality and can reduce your ad's Quality Score, increasing costs.

Analysis of the fourth site: Alter Formazione (https://alterformazione.it)

The data collected through Hosting Analyzer and Google PageSpeed ​​Insights show a rather critical situation in terms of performance, especially on the mobile side.

1. Hosting and server configuration

• CMS detected: WordPress

• Web Server: NGINX

• HTTP/2 support: active

• HTTP/3 support: not active

• Compression: Gzip is enabled, while Brotli and Zstd are not supported.

The most interesting data is that of the Time To First Byte (TTFB), which shows contrasting values:

• Desktop: 87–105 ms (very good, below Google's recommended threshold of 200 ms).

• Mobile: 729–734 ms (well above threshold, with unsatisfactory performance).

This discrepancy suggests that the server configuration is able to guarantee fast times in a desktop context, but not so much for mobile traffic, where factors such as resource weight, multiple requests or the lack of targeted optimizations likely come into play.

2. PageSpeed ​​Insights

Google's mobile report paints a worrying picture:

• Performances: 28/100 (red band, very low).

• Accessibility: 79/100 (acceptable but can be improved).

• Best practices: 96/100 (very good).

• SEO: 100/100 (excellent).

Rendering metrics are extremely bad:

• First Contentful Paint (FCP): 8,0 s → well above the recommended threshold (<2 s).

• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP): 14,7 s → critical value, the main content becomes visible too late.

3. General considerations

From a technical point of view, strong imbalances can be noted:

• Lato SEO e implementation best practices, the site performs well.

• Lato real user performance, the situation is very problematic. An LCP of almost 15 seconds makes the site practically unusable on mobile in medium or poor network conditions.

• The very good desktop TTFB does not translate into real fluidity: the main problem is related to the excessive weight of the page and the lack of resource loading optimizations.

4. Practical implications

A site with these characteristics presents concrete risks:

• Bad user experience: such long times make people abandon browsing before even viewing the contents.

• SEO penalized: despite the technical score of “100” on the SEO side, the Core Web Vitals values ​​are so poor that they negatively influence the ranking.

• Paid campaignsAny advertising investment is at risk of being compromised by extremely slow mobile loading, resulting in higher CPCs and lower conversion rates.

In scenarios of weak connectivity (unstable 4G, radio connections in rural areas, adverse weather conditions), a 14-second LCP It becomes a real exclusion factor: the user doesn't stay online and wait.

Analysis of the fifth and final site: Oro Etic (https://www.oroetic.it)

The site shows a significantly better situation than other projects analyzed, but with significant room for improvement, especially on the server side.

1. Hosting and server configuration

• CMS detected: WordPress

• Web Server: NGINX

• HTTP/2 support: active

• HTTP/3 support: not active

• Compression: Enables Gzip only; Brotli and Zstd are not supported.

Il Time To First Byte (TTFB) remains critical:

• Desktop: ~549 ms

• Mobile: ~520–560 ms

These values ​​are clearly beyond Google's recommended threshold of 200 msWhile not as restrictive as other sites in the group, they do represent a bottleneck that slows down the initial delivery of the page.

2. PageSpeed ​​Insights and Core web Vitals

Here the strengths emerge:

• Core Web Vitals Evaluation: exceeded.

• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP): 1,9 s → excellent, below the critical threshold of 2,5 s.

• Interaction to Next Paint (INP): 119 ms → excellent, well below 200–300 ms.

• Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS): 0,0 → perfect, no visible movement.

Other metrics:

• First Contentful Paint (FCP): 1,9 s → in line with best practices.

• Real TTFB: 1,1 s → confirms the delay already detected by Hosting Analyzer.

3. General considerations

From a technical point of view, oroetic.it stands out positively for its overall quality of user experience: main content becomes visible quickly and interaction is fluid.

However, TTFB still represents a weak point. While it doesn't prevent the Core Web Vitals from being exceeded, it remains well above the recommended target of 200 ms. This means that, with a more performing hosting infrastructure, overall loading times could be further reduced, with tangible benefits on:

• SEO: Google rewards not only exceeding the Core Web Vitals, but also fast server response times.

• User experience in challenging scenarios: Unstable 4G networks, radio connections or rural areas would make the delay of more than half a second in the initial response more noticeable.

• ROI of advertising campaigns: even small optimizations in loading times can significantly increase conversion rates.

4. Practical implications

In summary, oroetic.it represents a case in which the usability and rendering metrics are great, But the infrastructure part (TTFB) continues to be the limiting factor. Investing in performance-optimized hosting would allow an already competitive site to consolidate, eliminating the last technical bottleneck.

A general evaluation and consideration of the tested sites

From the analysis conducted on the various sites bearing the signature of Stratego Swat, a rather clear picture emerges: in almost all cases, Google's Core Web Vitals are not exceededThis data, in itself, is indicative of an approach in which the technical aspects of hosting and performance optimization do not receive the same attention as graphics or communication strategies.

Another recurring element concerns the lack of modern compression protocols. In some cases, the use of Gzip, now considered dated and less performing than the more modern one Brotli (de facto standard at international level) and above all with respect to Zstandard (ZSTD), emerging technology that we at Managed Server SRL we are the first and only ones in Italy to provide natively in our server stack, without depending on third-party solutions like Cloudflare.

Another common aspect is the lack of HTTP/3 (QUIC), which none of the analyzed sites adopt. This protocol, a natural evolution of HTTP/2, guarantees lower latencies and greater stability on unstable mobile connections, but it is not implemented. Support for more efficient image formats, such as WebP, appears limited: only one of the tested sites uses it, and it is the same one that manages to exceed the Core Web Vitals, a clear sign of a direct link between technological choices and concrete results.

From the analysis of the HTTP header and TTFB values, furthermore, no server-side caching configurations emerge. Technologies such as native caching of Nginx or, even better, the use of Varnish cache would have significantly reduced response times. High TTFBs (often over 500 ms and in some cases over 2 seconds) could have been reduced to values well under 50 ms with an adequate and optimized infrastructure.

Finally, a significant technical detail: All the analyzed sites are hosted on the same server, with the same IP address (46.16.91.179) which refers to ServerPlan, and are managed through the control panel PleskPlesk is certainly one of the most well-known and widespread solutions, superior to alternatives such as cPanel, DirectAdmin or open source solutions such as Webmin, but it still presents Structural limitations in implementing advanced configurations for web performanceIn other words, while it guarantees ease of use and stability, it doesn't allow you to reach the levels of optimization required today to compete on performance, SEO, and conversions.

What should a technologically appropriate landing page look like?

When it comes to landing pages, most agencies tend to focus on graphics, copywriting and persuasionThese are key aspects, of course, but they're not enough. A truly effective landing page is one that can transform traffic from campaigns into leads and sales, without losing value along the way. And to do this, underlying technology It is just as important as the visual and textual content.

Let's take our website's landing page as an example managedserver.it. The technical analysis clearly shows what it means to build a project optimized for performance and designed with the Google Core Web Vitals.

Real-world performance and response times

• TTFB (Time To First Byte) in the order of 30-40ms, well below Google's recommended 200 ms threshold. This means the server responds immediately, without making the user wait.

• FCP (First Contentful Paint) less than 1 second: content begins to appear almost immediately, improving the perception of speed.

• LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) of about 1 second: the main content is visible in optimal times, with an extremely fluid perceived experience.

• CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) equal to 0: the page is stable, no content “jumps” during loading.

• INP (Interaction to Next Paint) just above 100 ms: interactions are immediate, with no perceptible delays.

These values ​​are not random, but the result of precise choices: an optimized hosting infrastructure, an advanced caching layer and modern protocols such as HTTP/2, HTTP/3 (QUIC), multiple active compressions (Gzip, Brotli, ZSTD) and a server-side implementation that minimizes latency.

Resource optimization

Another fundamental element is the management of the static resources (images, CSS, JavaScript). On managedserver.it we use:

• Modern formats including WebP for images, which dramatically reduce weight without compromising quality.

• Minification and concatenation of CSS and JS files, to reduce the number of requests and speed up loading.

• Server-side caching (NGINX + Varnish) to instantly serve content to users, reducing waiting times.

Marketing and query strings

An often overlooked aspect is the management of marketing query string (As fbclid of Facebook or gclid (of Google Ads). These parameters, if not treated correctly, generate Unique URLs for each visit, invalidating caching and forcing the server to regenerate the same page for each user.

On managedserver.it we have implemented the intelligent query string stripping: The parameters are recorded for tracking purposes but do not impact site performance. This way, even traffic from Facebook or Google campaigns is served with the same speed and stability as direct visits, without any penalties.

The overall experience

A technologically adequate landing page must be thought of as a coherent system, where every element - from the server to compression, from caching to query string management - works to reduce loading times e improve user experienceIt's not just a matter of "pleasing Google":

• a faster page reduces the bounce rate,

• improves the Quality score of advertising campaigns,

• increases the conversion rate, because the user is more willing to stay and perform the desired action.

The example of managedserver.it demonstrates how technology can be an effective multiplier. It's not enough to create a visually appealing page: it must be built on an optimized infrastructure that can guarantee consistent and predictable performance, even in difficult network conditions (unstable 4G, rural areas, radio connections subject to degradation).

That's why, when we talk about landing pages and lead generation, Hosting and performance are not technical details, but real business factors.

Conclusions

Hosting is often considered a secondary technical aspect, almost invisible to the end customer. As long as the bottom line looks positive—more leads coming in than campaign spending—it might seem like there's no reason to worry. But this is a reductive view, overlooking the true potential of a well-structured digital strategy.

Return to the principles of operations research means looking beyond the short term: maximize revenue and minimize costs It's not just a matter of campaign optimization, but it also involves the technical infrastructure. fast and high-performance hosting It's not an additional cost, but a tool to reduce the real costs of lead generation, because it makes each advertising click more effective, reducing abandonment and increasing conversions.

Furthermore, a technically optimized site opens the door to an additional advantage: the natural organic positioningA site that respects the Core Web Vitals, with fast loading times and stable performance, not only supports paid campaigns, but in the long term can achieve and maintain better positions on Google. This means receiving additional leads in a continuous and free, without depending exclusively on the advertising budget.

In this scenario, agencies should adopt a collaborative approach: learning to “pass the ball” and focus on the areas where they really excel — creativity, communication, strategy — while relying on specialists for the more delicate technical aspects, such ashosting and web performance. Thus, each party works to the maximum of its competence and the result is a winning teamwork for the end customer, which achieves not only an immediate return on campaigns, but also a lasting competitive advantage thanks to organic growth over time.