Skip to content

33Across vs Rubicon Project

Based on 14 and 28 real audits

View 33Across details | View Rubicon Project details
Metric33AcrossRubicon ProjectWinner
Performance2930Rubicon Project
Accessibility868533Across
Best Practices7777Tie
SEO9091Rubicon Project
Security666433Across
TTFB311ms347ms33Across
Composite727133Across
Performance
33Across
29
Rubicon Project
30
Accessibility
33Across
86
Rubicon Project
85
Security
33Across
66
Rubicon Project
64
SEO
33Across
90
Rubicon Project
91
Composite
33Across
72
Rubicon Project
71

33Across outperforms Rubicon Project in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 71). Rubicon Project leads in performance, SEO.

When to choose 33Across

Choose 33Across when your primary concern is server response time and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Rubicon Project

Choose Rubicon Project when your primary concern is performance and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 14 audited 33Across sites and 28 audited Rubicon Project sites in the BeaverCheck database. Every audit runs the same 100+ checks — Lighthouse performance, security headers, accessibility, SEO, server response time — against a real URL. No vendor input, no sponsorship, no affiliate links. Read the full methodology →

FAQ

Which is faster, 33Across or Rubicon Project?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Rubicon Project sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (30 vs 29 on average).
Which has better security, 33Across or Rubicon Project?
33Across sites score higher on security analysis (66 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, 33Across or Rubicon Project?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor 33Across (86 vs 85). Both technologies can be made fully accessible with care — the difference reflects common patterns in the sampled sites, not inherent platform limits.
Which is better for SEO, 33Across or Rubicon Project?
Rubicon Project sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 90 on average), which cover meta tags, crawlability, mobile friendliness, and structured data. Content strategy and backlinks still matter more than platform choice for ranking.
Which has faster server response (TTFB), 33Across or Rubicon Project?
33Across sites show lower Time to First Byte (311 ms vs 347 ms on average). TTFB depends heavily on hosting and CDN setup rather than the technology itself, but the sampled sites suggest a meaningful difference in common deployment patterns.
Should I choose 33Across or Rubicon Project for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Rubicon Project scores higher on overall composite score while 33Across may excel in metrics you care about most. Run a free BeaverCheck audit on a real site using each to compare the metrics relevant to your use case.
Audit your own site

Send Feedback