Based on 95 and 2911 real audits
| Metric | Adobe Client Data Layer | HSTS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 33 | 51 | HSTS |
| Accessibility | 90 | 89 | Adobe Client Data Layer |
| Best Practices | 86 | 88 | HSTS |
| SEO | 89 | 91 | HSTS |
| Security | 67 | 72 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 372ms | 372ms | Tie |
| Composite | 72 | 76 | HSTS |
HSTS outperforms Adobe Client Data Layer in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 72). Adobe Client Data Layer leads in accessibility.
Choose Adobe Client Data Layer when your primary concern is accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose HSTS when your primary concern is performance and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 95 audited Adobe Client Data Layer sites and 2911 audited HSTS 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 →
Send Feedback