diff --git a/go-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc b/go-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
index 54688004..566f64e6 100644
--- a/go-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
+++ b/go-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ func timer(name string) func() {
 -- eagerLoading took 2m29.113482541s --  // <3>
 ----
 
-<1> With lazy loading, the first record is available almost instantly (i.e. as soon as the server has retrieved it).
+<1> With lazy loading, the first record is quickly available.
 <2> With eager loading, the first record is available ~25 seconds after the query has been submitted (i.e. after the server has retrieved all 250 records).
 <3> The total running time is lower with lazy loading, because while the client processes records the server can fetch the next ones.
 With lazy loading, the client could also stop requesting records after some condition is met (by calling `.Consume(ctx)` on the `Result`), saving time and resources.
diff --git a/python-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc b/python-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
index bf276d5c..e1aa2c59 100644
--- a/python-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
+++ b/python-manual/modules/ROOT/pages/performance.adoc
@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ if __name__ == '__main__':
 [1719984861.09] --- 149.70468592643738 seconds ---  // <4>
 ----
 
-<1> With lazy loading, the first record is available almost instantly (i.e. as soon as the server has retrieved it).
+<1> With lazy loading, the first record is quickly available.
 <2> With eager loading, the first record is available ~25 seconds after the query has been submitted (i.e. after the server has retrieved all 250 records).
 <3> Memory usage is larger with eager loading than with lazy loading, because the application materializes a list of 250 records.
 <4> The total running time is lower with lazy loading, because while the client processes records the server can fetch the next ones.