Skip to content

Apollo vs Lunr.js

Based on 45 and 2 real audits

View Apollo details | View Lunr.js details
MetricApolloLunr.jsWinner
Performance3058Lunr.js
Accessibility8985Apollo
Best Practices8596Lunr.js
SEO9384Apollo
Security6575Lunr.js
TTFB309ms388msApollo
Composite7375Lunr.js
Performance
Apollo
30
Lunr.js
58
Accessibility
Apollo
89
Lunr.js
85
Security
Apollo
65
Lunr.js
75
SEO
Apollo
93
Lunr.js
84
Composite
Apollo
73
Lunr.js
75

Lunr.js outperforms Apollo in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 73). Apollo leads in accessibility, 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 Lunr.js

Choose Lunr.js when your primary concern is performance and best practices. 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 2 audited Lunr.js 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, Apollo or Lunr.js?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Lunr.js sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (58 vs 30 on average).
Which has better security, Apollo or Lunr.js?
Lunr.js sites score higher on security analysis (75 vs 65 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Apollo or Lunr.js?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Apollo (89 vs 85). 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 Lunr.js?
Apollo sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (93 vs 84 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 Lunr.js?
Apollo sites show lower Time to First Byte (309 ms vs 388 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 Lunr.js for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Lunr.js 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