diff --git a/Explainers/Content-Type.md b/Explainers/Content-Type.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ab0f413
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Explainers/Content-Type.md
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
+# Content-Type in Resource Timing
+
+Proposal to add a new field `contentType` to PerformanceResourceTiming which holds a string corresponding to the [Content-type](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Type) header of the fetched resource
+
+## Use cases
+
+Servers and CDNs sometimes "swap out" file formats transparently (URL doesn't change) based on User Agent string, `Accept` headers or [Client Hints](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Client_hints) when responding to a request for a resource. By providing access to the content type in those cases it would be possible for developers to know exactly which format the server has declared.
+ - Useful to understand format adoption for a website
+ - From analytics perspective, this could be helpful in segregating user experiences based on the image formats the client decoded.
+
+(Reference : https://github.com/w3c/resource-timing/issues/203#issuecomment-889427414, https://github.com/w3c/resource-timing/issues/203#issuecomment-1109990279)
+
+## API Changes and Example Code
+
+The PerformanceResourceTiming Interface in <a href="https://w3c.github.io/resource-timing/#sec-performanceresourcetiming">resource-timing</a> would be updated to 
+```bash
+[Exposed=(Window,Worker)]
+interface PerformanceResourceTiming : PerformanceEntry {
+    ...
+    ...
+    readonly attribute DOMString contentType;
+    ...
+    ...
+    [Default] object toJSON();
+};
+```
+
+Sample usage:
+```javascript
+const entry_list = performance.getEntriesByType("resource");
+console.log(entry_list[0].contentType);
+```
+
+
+## Content type Values
+
+The content type value would reflect the [Content-Type](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Type) header on the response. It does NOT return the sniffed value.
+
+It would be an empty string if the [Cross-Origin-Resource-Sharing](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/CORS) [check](https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#concept-cors-check) fails.
+
+
+## Potential Spec Changes
+
+Fetch (https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1481)
+- Add content type field to response body info
+- In fetch reponse handover 3.3.6,  if request’s mode is not "navigate" or response’s has-cross-origin-redirects is false, set response body info's content type to extracted content type from it's headers list
+
+Resource Timing (https://github.com/w3c/resource-timing/pull/341)
+- [4.3](https://w3c.github.io/resource-timing/#sec-performanceresourcetiming) : Adding new field to interface : contentType
+- The `contentType` getter steps are to return this's resource info's content type after serializing if its not null and empty string otherwise
+
+
+## Security/Privacy Considerations
+- The content-type is behind CORS check and hence the server has to opt in to make the information available.
+
+### [Self-Review Questionnaire: Security and Privacy](https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/)
+
+> 01.  What information might this feature expose to Web sites or other parties,
+>      and for what purposes is that exposure necessary?
+
+It exposes the Content-type header value set by the server when the resource was fetched. It is only available when the CORS check passes.
+
+> 02.  Do features in your specification expose the minimum amount of information
+>      necessary to enable their intended uses?
+
+Yes
+
+> 03.  How do the features in your specification deal with personal information,
+>      personally-identifiable information (PII), or information derived from
+>      them?
+
+It does not deal with such information.
+
+> 04.  How do the features in your specification deal with sensitive information?
+
+It does not deal with sensitive information.
+
+> 05.  Do the features in your specification introduce new state for an origin
+>      that persists across browsing sessions?
+
+No.
+
+> 06.  Do the features in your specification expose information about the
+>      underlying platform to origins?
+
+No.
+
+> 07.  Does this specification allow an origin to send data to the underlying
+>      platform?
+
+No.
+
+> 08.  Do features in this specification enable access to device sensors?
+
+No.
+
+> 09.  Do features in this specification enable new script execution/loading
+>      mechanisms?
+
+No.
+
+> 10.  Do features in this specification allow an origin to access other devices?
+
+No.
+
+> 11.  Do features in this specification allow an origin some measure of control over
+>      a user agent's native UI?
+
+No.
+
+> 12.  What temporary identifiers do the features in this specification create or
+>      expose to the web?
+
+None.
+
+> 13.  How does this specification distinguish between behavior in first-party and
+>      third-party contexts?
+
+No distinction.
+
+> 14.  How do the features in this specification work in the context of a browser’s
+>      Private Browsing or Incognito mode?
+
+No difference.
+
+> 15.  Does this specification have both "Security Considerations" and "Privacy
+>      Considerations" sections?
+
+No.
+
+> 16.  Do features in your specification enable origins to downgrade default
+>      security protections?
+
+No.
+
+> 17.  How does your feature handle non-"fully active" documents?
+
+No difference.
+
+> 18.  What should this questionnaire have asked?
+
+None.
+
+
+## Changelog
+- Update 1 - Updated to only reflect the value of Content-type header instead of relying on sniffing
+- Update 2 - Allow user agents to truncate values
+- Update 3 - Add spec PR links
+- Update 4 - Return content-type as is without truncating (discussion : https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1481#pullrequestreview-1175803751)
+- Update 5 - Add Self-Review Questionnaire: Security and Privacy