Skip to content

AdOpt vs HSTS

Based on 1 and 2488 real audits

View AdOpt details | View HSTS details
MetricAdOptHSTSWinner
Performance3348HSTS
Accessibility10089AdOpt
Best Practices7787HSTS
SEO10091AdOpt
Security7869AdOpt
TTFB1440ms354msHSTS
Composite7575Tie
Performance
AdOpt
33
HSTS
48
Accessibility
AdOpt
100
HSTS
89
Security
AdOpt
78
HSTS
69
SEO
AdOpt
100
HSTS
91
Composite
AdOpt
75
HSTS
75

AdOpt and HSTS are closely matched, each leading in different categories. AdOpt has a composite score of 75 while HSTS scores 75.

When to choose AdOpt

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

When to choose HSTS

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 1 audited AdOpt sites and 2488 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 →

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.

FAQ

Which is faster, AdOpt or HSTS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (48 vs 33 on average).
Which has better security, AdOpt or HSTS?
AdOpt sites score higher on security analysis (78 vs 69 on average).
Which has better accessibility, AdOpt or HSTS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor AdOpt (100 vs 89). 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, AdOpt or HSTS?
AdOpt sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 91 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), AdOpt or HSTS?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (354 ms vs 1440 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 AdOpt or HSTS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HSTS scores higher on overall composite score while AdOpt 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