Based on 3 and 270 real audits
| Metric | Automizely | LazySizes | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 29 | 44 | LazySizes |
| Accessibility | 93 | 86 | Automizely |
| Best Practices | 83 | 87 | LazySizes |
| SEO | 94 | 92 | Automizely |
| Security | 74 | 66 | Automizely |
| TTFB | 366ms | 432ms | Automizely |
| Composite | 75 | 74 | Automizely |
Automizely outperforms LazySizes in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 74). LazySizes leads in performance, best practices.
Choose Automizely when your primary concern is server response time and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose LazySizes when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 3 audited Automizely sites and 270 audited LazySizes 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