Based on 5 and 1 real audits
| Metric | Ant Design | WP-Statistics | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 44 | 85 | WP-Statistics |
| Accessibility | 83 | 92 | WP-Statistics |
| Best Practices | 86 | 100 | WP-Statistics |
| SEO | 88 | 100 | WP-Statistics |
| Security | 66 | 87 | WP-Statistics |
| TTFB | 298ms | 61ms | WP-Statistics |
| Composite | 72 | 88 | WP-Statistics |
WP-Statistics outperforms Ant Design in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (88 vs 72). Ant Design leads in no categories.
Ant Design doesn't clearly lead WP-Statistics in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Choose WP-Statistics when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 5 audited Ant Design sites and 1 audited WP-Statistics 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