Based on 6 and 2490 real audits
| Metric | Constructor.io | HSTS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 33 | 48 | HSTS |
| Accessibility | 84 | 89 | HSTS |
| Best Practices | 79 | 88 | HSTS |
| SEO | 93 | 91 | Constructor.io |
| Security | 66 | 69 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 309ms | 355ms | Constructor.io |
| Composite | 71 | 75 | HSTS |
HSTS outperforms Constructor.io in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 71). Constructor.io leads in SEO, TTFB.
Choose Constructor.io when your primary concern is server response time and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose HSTS when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 6 audited Constructor.io sites and 2490 audited HSTS 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