| Metric | Adara | core-js | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 45 | 36 | Adara |
| Accessibility | 79 | 88 | core-js |
| Best Practices | 100 | 84 | Adara |
| SEO | 92 | 91 | Adara |
| Security | 66 | 65 | Adara |
| TTFB | 672ms | 379ms | core-js |
| Composite | 72 | 72 | Tie |
Adara outperforms core-js in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 72). core-js leads in accessibility, TTFB.
Choose Adara when your primary concern is best practices and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose core-js when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1 audited Adara sites and 1599 audited core-js 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