Skip to content

cdnjs vs Smile

Based on 461 and 1 real audits

View cdnjs details | View Smile details
MetriccdnjsSmileWinner
Performance4346Smile
Accessibility8892Smile
Best Practices8777cdnjs
SEO91100Smile
Security6880Smile
TTFB399ms507mscdnjs
Composite7481Smile
Performance
cdnjs
43
Smile
46
Accessibility
cdnjs
88
Smile
92
Security
cdnjs
68
Smile
80
SEO
cdnjs
91
Smile
100
Composite
cdnjs
74
Smile
81

Smile outperforms cdnjs in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (81 vs 74). cdnjs leads in best practices, TTFB.

When to choose cdnjs

Choose cdnjs when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Smile

Choose Smile when your primary concern is security and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 461 audited cdnjs sites and 1 audited Smile 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.

FAQ

Which is faster, cdnjs or Smile?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Smile sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (46 vs 43 on average).
Which has better security, cdnjs or Smile?
Smile sites score higher on security analysis (80 vs 68 on average).
Which has better accessibility, cdnjs or Smile?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Smile (92 vs 88). Both technologies can be made fully accessible with care — the difference reflects common patterns in the sampled sites, not inherent platform limits.
Which is better for SEO, cdnjs or Smile?
Smile sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 91 on average), which cover meta tags, crawlability, mobile friendliness, and structured data. Content strategy and backlinks still matter more than platform choice for ranking.
Which has faster server response (TTFB), cdnjs or Smile?
cdnjs sites show lower Time to First Byte (399 ms vs 507 ms on average). TTFB depends heavily on hosting and CDN setup rather than the technology itself, but the sampled sites suggest a meaningful difference in common deployment patterns.
Should I choose cdnjs or Smile for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Smile scores higher on overall composite score while cdnjs may excel in metrics you care about most. Run a free BeaverCheck audit on a real site using each to compare the metrics relevant to your use case.
Audit your own site

Send Feedback