Based on 1 and 2599 real audits
| Metric | Apple MapKit JS | HSTS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 56 | 48 | Apple MapKit JS |
| Accessibility | 92 | 89 | Apple MapKit JS |
| Best Practices | 100 | 88 | Apple MapKit JS |
| SEO | 92 | 91 | Apple MapKit JS |
| Security | 75 | 70 | Apple MapKit JS |
| TTFB | 65ms | 365ms | Apple MapKit JS |
| Composite | 80 | 75 | Apple MapKit JS |
Apple MapKit JS outperforms HSTS in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (80 vs 75). HSTS leads in no categories.
Choose Apple MapKit JS when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
HSTS doesn't clearly lead Apple MapKit JS in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Scores are medians across 1 audited Apple MapKit JS sites and 2599 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 →
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