Skip to content

Angular Material vs Ant Design

Based on 1 and 5 real audits

View Angular Material details | View Ant Design details
MetricAngular MaterialAnt DesignWinner
Performance8544Angular Material
Accessibility9283Angular Material
Best Practices10086Angular Material
SEO10088Angular Material
Security8766Angular Material
TTFB61ms298msAngular Material
Composite8872Angular Material
Performance
Angular Material
85
Ant Design
44
Accessibility
Angular Material
92
Ant Design
83
Security
Angular Material
87
Ant Design
66
SEO
Angular Material
100
Ant Design
88
Composite
Angular Material
88
Ant Design
72

Angular Material outperforms Ant Design in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (88 vs 72). Ant Design leads in no categories.

When to choose Angular Material

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

When to choose Ant Design

Ant Design doesn't clearly lead Angular Material in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 1 audited Angular Material sites and 5 audited Ant Design 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, Angular Material or Ant Design?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Angular Material sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (85 vs 44 on average).
Which has better security, Angular Material or Ant Design?
Angular Material sites score higher on security analysis (87 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Angular Material or Ant Design?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Angular Material (92 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, Angular Material or Ant Design?
Angular Material sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 88 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), Angular Material or Ant Design?
Angular Material sites show lower Time to First Byte (61 ms vs 298 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 Angular Material or Ant Design for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Angular Material scores higher on overall composite score while Angular Material 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