Skip to content

ClickDimensions vs Font Awesome

Based on 1 and 575 real audits

View ClickDimensions details | View Font Awesome details
MetricClickDimensionsFont AwesomeWinner
Performance2544Font Awesome
Accessibility8487Font Awesome
Best Practices7787Font Awesome
SEO9291ClickDimensions
Security6165Font Awesome
TTFB113ms453msClickDimensions
Composite6873Font Awesome
Performance
ClickDimensions
25
Font Awesome
44
Accessibility
ClickDimensions
84
Font Awesome
87
Security
ClickDimensions
61
Font Awesome
65
SEO
ClickDimensions
92
Font Awesome
91
Composite
ClickDimensions
68
Font Awesome
73

Font Awesome outperforms ClickDimensions in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 68). ClickDimensions leads in SEO, TTFB.

When to choose ClickDimensions

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

When to choose Font Awesome

Choose Font Awesome when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 1 audited ClickDimensions sites and 575 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.

FAQ

Which is faster, ClickDimensions or Font Awesome?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Font Awesome sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (44 vs 25 on average).
Which has better security, ClickDimensions or Font Awesome?
Font Awesome sites score higher on security analysis (65 vs 61 on average).
Which has better accessibility, ClickDimensions or Font Awesome?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Font Awesome (87 vs 84). 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, ClickDimensions or Font Awesome?
ClickDimensions sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 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), ClickDimensions or Font Awesome?
ClickDimensions sites show lower Time to First Byte (113 ms vs 453 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 ClickDimensions or Font Awesome for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Font Awesome scores higher on overall composite score while ClickDimensions 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