"Modern" used to mean a look. Now it means a number.

For most of the last decade, calling a site modern meant pointing at an aesthetic: glassmorphism, neumorphism, a particular font pairing, a particular shade of gradient. Those trends still cycle through. What changed is that "modern" now gets measured, not just seen, and the measurements are unflattering for a lot of sites that still think they qualify.

The weight problem nobody’s fixing

The median mobile homepage now weighs 2,362 kilobytes, a 202 percent increase since 2015, according to Figma’s 2026 web design research. The average mobile page loads 632 kilobytes of JavaScript alone. Only 48 percent of mobile websites achieved good Core Web Vitals scores in 2025. Meanwhile mobile devices accounted for 51.4 percent of online sales in October 2025, up 11.6 percent year over year, and mobile bounce rates surged 54 percent in 2025, with half of mobile visitors leaving after a single page.

Put plainly: the majority of web traffic is now mobile, the majority of mobile sites are heavier than they’ve ever been, and visitors are leaving faster than ever as a direct result. A site can look modern and still be actively losing the audience it was built for.

Accessibility isn’t a checkbox, it’s 96 percent of the internet failing

WebAIM’s February 2026 analysis of the top one million home pages found 95.9 percent had detected WCAG failures, up from 94.8 percent the year before. Low contrast text remained the single most common issue, present on 83.9 percent of pages. The average homepage carried 56.1 accessibility errors, a 10.1 percent increase from 2025’s average of 51.

That trend line is the wrong direction. Every year the tooling to catch these issues gets better and cheaper, and every year the number of sites failing basic standards goes up anyway. That’s not a technical gap. It’s a priority gap.

AI is already inside the workflow. That’s not the debate anymore.

Thirty-four percent of designers shipped an AI-powered product in 2025, up from 22 percent the year before, per Figma’s research. Within the design process itself, a third of designers now use AI to generate raw assets, and about a fifth use it for interface drafts or layout exploration. But only 40 percent of those designers believe AI actually improves the quality of the work, and 94 percent manually review everything AI produces before it ships.

That’s the honest state of things, and it lines up with where we already stood on this: AI has a seat at our table. It will never take ours. The tool is common now. The judgment about what it produces is still entirely human, and the data backs that up better than any opinion piece could.

What actually differentiates a modern site now

If AI can draft a layout and a component library can assemble a page, the interface itself stops being the differentiator. Nielsen Norman Group’s design team made this point directly in their 2026 outlook.

“Adaptability, strategy, and discernment are the skills that will serve us best.”

Kate Moran, Raluca Budiu, and Sarah Gibbons, Nielsen Norman Group

We’d add one more word to that list: restraint. The sites winning in 2026 aren’t the ones with the most features or the newest visual trick. They’re the ones that loaded fast, worked for someone using a screen reader, and made a small number of deliberate decisions instead of a large number of default ones.

What we actually build to

Every site we ship gets checked against the same three questions before it’s considered finished, not just pretty. Does it load fast on a mid-range phone on a bad connection. Can someone using a screen reader or keyboard-only navigation actually complete the task the page exists for. And if we used AI anywhere in the process, did a person make every decision that mattered, or did we let the tool decide by default.

“A beautiful site that fails Core Web Vitals and locks out a third of its accessibility audience isn’t modern. It’s a demo that never shipped.”

Jordan Ashworth-Cole, Director of Digital & UX, HAUS XXIV