Skip to content

AMP vs HSTS

Based on 55 and 3017 real audits

View AMP details | View HSTS details
MetricAMPHSTSWinner
Performance4952HSTS
Accessibility8489HSTS
Best Practices8789HSTS
SEO9291AMP
Security6772HSTS
TTFB658ms385msHSTS
Composite7477HSTS
Performance
AMP
49
HSTS
52
Accessibility
AMP
84
HSTS
89
Security
AMP
67
HSTS
72
SEO
AMP
92
HSTS
91
Composite
AMP
74
HSTS
77

HSTS outperforms AMP in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (77 vs 74). AMP leads in SEO.

When to choose AMP

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 55 audited AMP sites and 3017 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 →

FAQ

Which is faster, AMP or HSTS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (52 vs 49 on average).
Which has better security, AMP or HSTS?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (72 vs 67 on average).
Which has better accessibility, AMP or HSTS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 84). 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, AMP or HSTS?
AMP sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 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), AMP or HSTS?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (385 ms vs 658 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 AMP or HSTS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HSTS scores higher on overall composite score while AMP 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