Skip to content

AMP vs HSTS

Based on 43 and 2656 real audits

View AMP details | View HSTS details
MetricAMPHSTSWinner
Performance4849HSTS
Accessibility8389HSTS
Best Practices8788HSTS
SEO9391AMP
Security6470HSTS
TTFB672ms381msHSTS
Composite7275HSTS
Performance
AMP
48
HSTS
49
Accessibility
AMP
83
HSTS
89
Security
AMP
64
HSTS
70
SEO
AMP
93
HSTS
91
Composite
AMP
72
HSTS
75

HSTS outperforms AMP in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 72). 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 43 audited AMP sites and 2656 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 (49 vs 48 on average).
Which has better security, AMP or HSTS?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, AMP or HSTS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 83). 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 (93 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 (381 ms vs 672 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