Skip to content

Apollo vs HSTS

Based on 45 and 2556 real audits

View Apollo details | View HSTS details
MetricApolloHSTSWinner
Performance3049HSTS
Accessibility8989Tie
Best Practices8588HSTS
SEO9391Apollo
Security6570HSTS
TTFB309ms364msApollo
Composite7375HSTS
Performance
Apollo
30
HSTS
49
Accessibility
Apollo
89
HSTS
89
Security
Apollo
65
HSTS
70
SEO
Apollo
93
HSTS
91
Composite
Apollo
73
HSTS
75

HSTS outperforms Apollo in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 73). Apollo leads in SEO, TTFB.

When to choose Apollo

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 45 audited Apollo sites and 2556 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, Apollo or HSTS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (49 vs 30 on average).
Which has better security, Apollo or HSTS?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 65 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Apollo or HSTS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Apollo (89 vs 89). 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, Apollo or HSTS?
Apollo 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), Apollo or HSTS?
Apollo sites show lower Time to First Byte (309 ms vs 364 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 Apollo or HSTS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HSTS scores higher on overall composite score while Apollo 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