| Metric | Amazon ELB | ExtJS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 36 | 0 | Amazon ELB |
| Accessibility | 89 | 46 | Amazon ELB |
| Best Practices | 88 | 73 | Amazon ELB |
| SEO | 91 | 91 | Tie |
| Security | 63 | 57 | Amazon ELB |
| TTFB | 403ms | 145ms | ExtJS |
| Composite | 70 | 66 | Amazon ELB |
Amazon ELB outperforms ExtJS in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (70 vs 66). ExtJS leads in TTFB.
Choose Amazon ELB when your primary concern is accessibility and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose ExtJS when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 173 audited Amazon ELB sites and 1 audited ExtJS 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