Based on 1582 and 201 real audits
| Metric | core-js | Funding Choices | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 36 | 33 | core-js |
| Accessibility | 88 | 85 | core-js |
| Best Practices | 84 | 79 | core-js |
| SEO | 91 | 91 | Tie |
| Security | 65 | 63 | core-js |
| TTFB | 374ms | 358ms | Funding Choices |
| Composite | 72 | 71 | core-js |
core-js outperforms Funding Choices in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 71). Funding Choices leads in TTFB.
Choose core-js when your primary concern is best practices and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Funding Choices when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1582 audited core-js sites and 201 audited Funding Choices 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 →
Send Feedback