| Metric | core-js | JW Player | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 37 | 34 | core-js |
| Accessibility | 88 | 84 | core-js |
| Best Practices | 86 | 83 | core-js |
| SEO | 91 | 89 | core-js |
| Security | 68 | 64 | core-js |
| TTFB | 483ms | 572ms | core-js |
| Composite | 74 | 71 | core-js |
core-js outperforms JW Player in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (74 vs 71). JW Player leads in no categories.
Choose core-js when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
JW Player doesn't clearly lead core-js in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Scores are medians across 2041 audited core-js sites and 43 audited JW Player 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