Based on 6 and 559 real audits
| Metric | Bunny Fonts | Font Awesome | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 44 | 44 | Tie |
| Accessibility | 84 | 87 | Font Awesome |
| Best Practices | 87 | 87 | Tie |
| SEO | 93 | 91 | Bunny Fonts |
| Security | 63 | 65 | Font Awesome |
| TTFB | 311ms | 456ms | Bunny Fonts |
| Composite | 73 | 73 | Tie |
Bunny Fonts and Font Awesome are closely matched, each leading in different categories. Bunny Fonts has a composite score of 73 while Font Awesome scores 73.
Choose Bunny Fonts when your primary concern is server response time and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Font Awesome when your primary concern is accessibility and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 6 audited Bunny Fonts sites and 559 audited Font Awesome 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