| Metric | CFML | Java | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 38 | 37 | CFML |
| Accessibility | 85 | 89 | Java |
| Best Practices | 91 | 84 | CFML |
| SEO | 78 | 89 | Java |
| Security | 64 | 65 | Java |
| TTFB | 168ms | 376ms | CFML |
| Composite | 72 | 72 | Tie |
CFML and Java are closely matched, each leading in different categories. CFML has a composite score of 72 while Java scores 72.
Choose CFML when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Java when your primary concern is SEO and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 3 audited CFML sites and 212 audited Java 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