Skip to content

cdnjs vs Strikingly

Based on 343 and 1 real audits

View cdnjs details | View Strikingly details
MetriccdnjsStrikinglyWinner
Performance3917cdnjs
Accessibility8888Tie
Best Practices8669cdnjs
SEO90100Strikingly
Security6455cdnjs
TTFB360ms668mscdnjs
Composite7268cdnjs
Performance
cdnjs
39
Strikingly
17
Accessibility
cdnjs
88
Strikingly
88
Security
cdnjs
64
Strikingly
55
SEO
cdnjs
90
Strikingly
100
Composite
cdnjs
72
Strikingly
68

cdnjs outperforms Strikingly in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 68). Strikingly leads in SEO.

When to choose cdnjs

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

When to choose Strikingly

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 343 audited cdnjs sites and 1 audited Strikingly 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 Strikingly?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, cdnjs sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (39 vs 17 on average).
Which has better security, cdnjs or Strikingly?
cdnjs sites score higher on security analysis (64 vs 55 on average).
Which has better accessibility, cdnjs or Strikingly?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor cdnjs (88 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 Strikingly?
Strikingly sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 90 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 Strikingly?
cdnjs sites show lower Time to First Byte (360 ms vs 668 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 Strikingly for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. cdnjs 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