| Metric | Bidmatic | Hansel | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 30 | 35 | Hansel |
| Accessibility | 84 | 93 | Hansel |
| Best Practices | 73 | 73 | Tie |
| SEO | 91 | 92 | Hansel |
| Security | 64 | 67 | Hansel |
| TTFB | 373ms | 85ms | Hansel |
| Composite | 70 | 72 | Hansel |
Hansel outperforms Bidmatic in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 70). Bidmatic leads in no categories.
Bidmatic doesn't clearly lead Hansel in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Choose Hansel when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 24 audited Bidmatic sites and 1 audited Hansel 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