Only 14 of 672 UK retail sites score “good” on mobile, while nearly 60% are rated “poor”

This is not a long tail problem. It runs through the market.

The gap between where customers are and where the experience meets them is wide, and it is measurable. Smartphones account for the majority of traffic across every retail sector in this dataset, yet mobile performance consistently lags behind desktop by more than 16 points on average. Some brands are 30 points apart or more.

That gap has persisted because desktop has been good enough. Conversion held. Stakeholders were reassured. Mobile was treated as a responsive adaptation of something built for a larger screen.

Most UK retailers have been optimising for the wrong screen.

Desktop has been a comfort

Part of the reason this has persisted is that desktop performance remains good enough.

Across the same dataset, desktop scores are consistently higher. Not exceptional, but strong enough to sustain conversion and reassure stakeholders that the experience broadly works.

The gap, however, is persistent. On average, mobile scores sit more than 16 points lower, with some brands much further apart.

This reflects where attention has historically been focused. Many retail sites have evolved around desktop, with mobile adapting around it.

The result is a dual experience: one that works reliably, and one that works less well.

The issue is widely shared

This is not confined to smaller brands or constrained teams.

The benchmark shows underperformance across the market, including among well-established retailers with significant investment and recent transformation programmes.

Where performance breaks down

The causes are not new. They tend to build over time.

Mobile pages are carrying too much. Campaigns, tracking, personalisation and content all load together, creating pages that appear complete but take longer than they should to become usable.

Customers feel this immediately. The page loads, but the experience lags behind it. Interactions are not quite instant. Scrolling lacks fluidity. The site keeps adjusting after use has begun.

Nothing is broken. It simply doesn’t keep pace.

What customers experience 

What customers experience in practice is less consistent. Only 43% of UK retail sites deliver a smooth mobile journey from load through to interaction.

Most introduce friction somewhere along the way - whether in how quickly the page becomes usable, how it responds, or how settled it is once interaction begins.

First impressions are often acceptable. The page appears quickly enough. The issue is what follows. The journey slows. Responses are not immediate. The page continues to adjust after use has begun.

Each of these is minor in isolation. In combination, they are not.

The commercial effect

The relationship between performance and outcome is well established.

Small improvements in speed increase conversion and customer spend. Delays have the opposite effect. On mobile, where journeys are compressed, that effect is more pronounced.

Cart abandonment is higher. Completion rates are lower. Not dramatically, but consistently. The impact is gradual, but it adds up quickly.

A question of measurement

The benchmark also highlights a gap between how sites are tested and how they are experienced.

Performance scores often reflect a first visit under controlled conditions. Customer data reflects something else - repeat visits, variable connections, different devices.

The two do not always align.

Some sites look strong in testing but feel slower in use. Others appear weaker on paper but perform adequately for returning customers. The distinction matters because it shapes where investment goes.

Viewed in isolation, each can mislead. Taken together, they offer a more reliable picture.

How the problem builds

The issue is rarely a single decision. It is the accumulation of many.

Retail sites reflect competing priorities - marketing, product, legal - each adding capability, and weight.

Over time, the experience becomes heavier and less predictable, particularly on mobile. Nothing breaks. It simply gives way.

The minority that perform well

A small proportion of brands manage this balance effectively.

They face the same complexity, but are more deliberate - introducing functionality selectively, controlling third-party dependencies, and treating performance as part of the product.

The decision ahead

For senior digital leaders, the question is no longer whether mobile matters, but how seriously performance is taken.

It rarely fails outright. It simply underdelivers, often in ways that are easy to overlook.

The benchmark provides a clear reference point - showing what is typical, and what is possible.

What can be done

Improving mobile performance is rarely about a single intervention. It is the result of discipline.

Reducing unnecessary weight. Prioritising what loads first. Managing third-party tools with greater control. Treating responsiveness as part of the experience, not an afterthought.

The aim is not to do less, but to be more deliberate - what loads, when, and why.

The starting point is clarity: where friction sits in the journey, and what it is costing.

Benchmarking at market level can provide that perspective, placing performance in context and identifying where change will have the greatest effect.