| Metric | 6sense | Lunio | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 28 | 41 | Lunio |
| Accessibility | 90 | 99 | Lunio |
| Best Practices | 78 | 86 | Lunio |
| SEO | 93 | 94 | Lunio |
| Security | 67 | 69 | Lunio |
| TTFB | 270ms | 63ms | Lunio |
| Composite | 73 | 75 | Lunio |
Lunio outperforms 6sense in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 73). 6sense leads in no categories.
6sense doesn't clearly lead Lunio in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Choose Lunio when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 27 audited 6sense sites and 4 audited Lunio 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 →
Small sample: one or both technologies have fewer than 10 audited sites. Treat these numbers as directional — medians stabilize around 20–30 audits per side.
Send Feedback