Based on 1 and 3866 real audits
| Metric | Campaign Monitor | Google Search Console | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 51 | 44 | Campaign Monitor |
| Accessibility | 89 | 88 | Campaign Monitor |
| Best Practices | 77 | 86 | Google Search Console |
| SEO | 100 | 90 | Campaign Monitor |
| Security | 64 | 67 | Google Search Console |
| TTFB | 994ms | 346ms | Google Search Console |
| Composite | 74 | 73 | Campaign Monitor |
Campaign Monitor outperforms Google Search Console in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (74 vs 73). Google Search Console leads in best practices, security, TTFB.
Choose Campaign Monitor when your primary concern is SEO and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Google Search Console when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1 audited Campaign Monitor sites and 3866 audited Google Search Console 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