Based on 1 and 1 real audits
| Metric | Accentuate Custom Fields | Smile App | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 2 | 46 | Smile App |
| Accessibility | 72 | 92 | Smile App |
| Best Practices | 77 | 77 | Tie |
| SEO | 85 | 100 | Smile App |
| Security | 70 | 80 | Smile App |
| TTFB | 185ms | 507ms | Accentuate Custom Fields |
| Composite | 72 | 81 | Smile App |
Smile App outperforms Accentuate Custom Fields in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (81 vs 72). Accentuate Custom Fields leads in TTFB.
Choose Accentuate Custom Fields when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Smile App when your primary concern is performance and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1 audited Accentuate Custom Fields sites and 1 audited Smile App 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