Official statement
Other statements from this video 50 ▾
- 0:33 Does Google really see the HTML you think is optimized?
- 0:33 Does the rendered HTML in Search Console really reflect what Googlebot indexes?
- 1:47 Does late JavaScript really hurt your Google indexing?
- 1:47 What are the chances that Googlebot is missing your critical JavaScript changes?
- 2:23 Does Google really rewrite your title tags and meta descriptions: should you still optimize them?
- 3:03 Is it true that Google rewrites your title tags and meta descriptions at will?
- 3:45 What’s the key difference between DOMContentLoaded and the load event that could reshape Google’s rendering approach?
- 3:45 What event does Googlebot really wait for to index your content: DOMContentLoaded or Load?
- 6:23 How can you prioritize hybrid server/client rendering without harming your SEO?
- 6:23 Should you really prioritize critical content server-side before metadata in SSR?
- 7:27 Should you avoid using the canonical tag on the server side if it’s incorrect at the first render?
- 8:00 Should you remove the canonical tag instead of correcting an incorrect one using JavaScript?
- 9:06 How can you find out which canonical Google has actually retained for your pages?
- 9:38 Does URL Inspection really uncover canonical conflicts?
- 10:08 Should you really ignore noindex settings for your JS and CSS files?
- 10:08 Should you add a noindex to JavaScript and CSS files?
- 10:39 Can you really rely on Google's cache: to diagnose an SEO issue?
- 10:39 Is it true that Google's cache is a trap for testing your page's rendering?
- 11:10 Should you really worry about the screenshot in Search Console?
- 11:10 Do failed screenshots in Google Search Console really block indexing?
- 12:14 Should you still be concerned about native lazy loading for SEO?
- 12:26 Is it really essential to split your JavaScript by page to optimize crawling?
- 12:26 Can JavaScript code splitting really enhance your crawl budget and improve your Core Web Vitals?
- 12:46 Why are your mobile Lighthouse scores consistently lower than on desktop?
- 12:46 Why are your Lighthouse mobile scores consistently lower than desktop?
- 13:50 Is your lazy loading preventing Google from detecting your images?
- 13:50 Can poorly implemented lazy loading really make your images invisible to Google?
- 16:36 Does client-side rendering really work with Googlebot?
- 16:58 Is it true that client-side JavaScript rendering really harms Google indexing?
- 17:23 Where can you find Google's official JavaScript SEO documentation?
- 18:37 Should you really align desktop, mobile, and AMP behaviors to avoid SEO pitfalls?
- 19:17 Should you really unify the mobile, desktop, and AMP experience to avoid penalties?
- 19:48 Should you really fix a JavaScript-heavy WordPress theme if Google indexes it correctly?
- 19:48 Should you really avoid JavaScript for SEO, or is it just a persistent myth?
- 21:22 Is it possible to have great Core Web Vitals while running a technically flawed site?
- 21:22 Can you really have a good FID while suffering from catastrophic TTI?
- 23:23 Does FOUC really ruin your Core Web Vitals performance?
- 23:23 Does FOUC really harm your organic SEO?
- 25:01 Does JavaScript really drain your crawl budget?
- 25:01 Does JavaScript really consume more crawl budget than classic HTML?
- 28:43 Should you restrict access for users without JavaScript to protect your SEO?
- 28:43 Is it true that blocking a site without JavaScript risks an SEO penalty?
- 30:10 Why do your Lighthouse scores never truly reflect your users' real experience?
- 30:16 Why don't your Lighthouse scores truly reflect your site's real performance?
- 34:02 Does Google's render tree make your SEO testing tools obsolete?
- 34:34 Does Google’s render tree really matter for your SEO strategy?
- 35:38 Should you really be worried about unloaded resources in Search Console?
- 36:08 Should you really worry about loading errors in Search Console?
- 37:23 Why doesn’t Google need to download your images to index them?
- 38:14 Does Googlebot really download images during the main crawl?
Googlebot, based on headless Chromium, now supports the loading='lazy' attribute for images. In practical terms, images with native lazy loading can be discovered and indexed by Google without custom JavaScript. It remains to ensure that the initial viewport contains enough content to trigger full page rendering.
What you need to understand
What is native lazy loading and why does this statement matter?
Native lazy loading relies on the HTML attribute loading='lazy' introduced in modern browsers. This attribute delays image loading until they approach the user's viewport, thereby reducing the initial weight of the page and improving Core Web Vitals.
Before this announcement, many SEOs wondered if Googlebot — which doesn’t scroll like a human — could discover these deferred images. Martin Splitt's official response clears up some ambiguity: Googlebot understands this attribute and knows it must load these resources to properly index visual content.
How does Googlebot treat a page with native lazy loading?
Googlebot uses a headless version of Chromium, the Chrome engine. This version adheres to web standards, including the native behavior of the loading='lazy' attribute.
The bot starts by loading the initial viewport. If images have this attribute and are outside the viewport, it still triggers their loading during the JavaScript rendering phase. Unlike a custom lazy loading script that requires simulated scrolling, native lazy loading is automatically interpreted by the rendering engine.
However, beware: Googlebot does not perform endless scrolling. If a lazy image is too far down the page or depends on a complex user event, it may not be discovered.
What is the impact on image indexing?
Images with native lazy loading can be indexed in Google Images if they are accessible during rendering. This is an improvement over old JS libraries that sometimes blocked crawling.
That said, the indexing of an image also depends on its relevance, alt tags, the semantic context around it, and its perceived quality. Native lazy loading facilitates technical discovery but does not guarantee a high ranking in image results.
- Googlebot supports the loading='lazy' attribute: no need to worry that your lazy images won't be seen.
- Native lazy loading is less risky than poorly implemented custom JavaScript solutions.
- Images must remain accessible in the source HTML with a valid URL: no empty src replaced by JS.
- The initial viewport must contain sufficient content for Googlebot to trigger full rendering.
- Native lazy loading does not negatively impact SEO if well configured, but it does not exempt you from optimizing alt, title, and semantic context.
SEO Expert opinion
Is this statement consistent with field observations?
Yes, generally. Since Googlebot switched to headless Chromium, field reports show that pages using native lazy loading correctly index their images — provided the source HTML contains the actual URL in src or data-src recognized by the standard.
However, some tests indicate that if a page has dozens of lazy images far down in the DOM, not all may be crawled on the first pass. Googlebot has a limited render budget: it will not wait indefinitely for all lazy resources to load. [To be verified] on long pages with infinite scroll or complex progressive loading.
What nuances should be added to this statement?
Martin Splitt's statement remains generic. It does not specify whether Googlebot simulates a mobile or desktop viewport, nor how long it waits for lazy images to load before considering the page rendered.
Moreover, native lazy loading depends on the browser and its internal logic for loading thresholds. Chromium loads lazy images when they are at a certain distance from the viewport — a distance that can vary by version and connection. Does Googlebot follow this logic exactly? Probably, but without official data, it's reverse engineering.
Another point: this statement says nothing about lazy iframes or videos. One can assume that support extends to all native elements accepting the loading attribute, but this is not explicit.
In what cases does this rule not apply?
If you are using a custom JavaScript library for lazy loading that replaces src with data-src or another proprietary attribute, this statement does not directly apply to you. Googlebot will only understand these mechanisms if it executes your JS and it works well in a headless environment.
Similarly, if your lazy images depend on a user event — click, hover, infinite scroll via non-standard intersection observer — Googlebot may not detect them. Native lazy loading is passive: it automatically triggers on rendering. A script waiting for human action blocks the bot.
Practical impact and recommendations
What practical steps should you take to leverage this statement?
Migrate to native lazy loading wherever possible. Replace your custom lazy loading scripts with the HTML attribute loading='lazy' on your <img> and <iframe> tags. It’s lighter, faster, and Googlebot understands it natively.
Ensure the src attribute always contains the actual URL of the image, never a placeholder or a generic data-URI. Native lazy loading delays network loading, but the browser must know the URL right from the start to schedule the request.
What mistakes should be avoided with native lazy loading?
Do not mark loading='lazy' on images in the initial viewport — those visible without scrolling. This unnecessarily delays their loading and degrades LCP (Largest Contentful Paint), a critical metric for Core Web Vitals.
Avoid lazy loading critical images for SEO: logo, hero image, key products. If an image carries significant SEO weight, load it normally or in preload to ensure its immediate discovery.
Be cautious with CMS or builders that automatically apply loading='lazy' to all images indiscriminately. Manually check strategic pages and adjust behavior if needed.
How can I verify that my native lazy loading is being crawled by Google?
Use the URL Inspection tool in Google Search Console. Request a live test, then check the "Screenshot" tab and "More info" > "Rendered HTML". Ensure that your lazy images appear in the final DOM and that their URLs are present.
Cross-reference with server logs: Googlebot should make HTTP requests to your images. If they do not appear in the logs while being in native lazy loading, this is a warning signal.
Also monitor the Coverage and Images reports in Search Console. If lazy images disappear from the index after migration, audit the source HTML code and behavior in headless.
- Switch to <img loading='lazy'> tags instead of custom JS scripts
- Always provide src with the actual URL, never a placeholder
- Never lazy load images in the initial viewport or those critical for LCP
- Test each strategic page with URL Inspection and check the rendering
- Cross-check with server logs to confirm that Googlebot is loading the images
- Regularly audit the Images report in Search Console
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Googlebot charge-t-il toutes les images en loading='lazy' d'une page ?
Le lazy loading natif ralentit-il l'indexation de mes images ?
Puis-je utiliser loading='lazy' sur toutes mes images sans risque SEO ?
Faut-il abandonner les solutions JavaScript de lazy loading au profit du natif ?
Comment savoir si Googlebot a bien vu mes images lazy dans le rendu ?
🎥 From the same video 50
Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 39 min · published on 17/06/2020
🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →
💬 Comments (0)
Be the first to comment.