Skip to content

Apache vs Culqi

Based on 460 and 1 real audits

View Apache details | View Culqi details
MetricApacheCulqiWinner
Performance5045Apache
Accessibility8784Apache
Best Practices88100Culqi
SEO9092Culqi
Security6556Apache
TTFB551ms2204msApache
Composite7368Apache
Performance
Apache
50
Culqi
45
Accessibility
Apache
87
Culqi
84
Security
Apache
65
Culqi
56
SEO
Apache
90
Culqi
92
Composite
Apache
73
Culqi
68

Apache outperforms Culqi in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 68). Culqi leads in best practices, SEO.

When to choose Apache

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

When to choose Culqi

Choose Culqi when your primary concern is best practices and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 460 audited Apache sites and 1 audited Culqi 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, Apache or Culqi?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Apache sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (50 vs 45 on average).
Which has better security, Apache or Culqi?
Apache sites score higher on security analysis (65 vs 56 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Apache or Culqi?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Apache (87 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, Apache or Culqi?
Culqi sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 vs 90 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), Apache or Culqi?
Apache sites show lower Time to First Byte (551 ms vs 2204 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 Apache or Culqi for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Apache scores higher on overall composite score while Apache 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