Based on 1555 and 2 real audits
| Metric | core-js | Optimization Detective | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 36 | 55 | Optimization Detective |
| Accessibility | 88 | 94 | Optimization Detective |
| Best Practices | 84 | 81 | core-js |
| SEO | 91 | 92 | Optimization Detective |
| Security | 65 | 71 | Optimization Detective |
| TTFB | 370ms | 4253ms | core-js |
| Composite | 72 | 77 | Optimization Detective |
Optimization Detective outperforms core-js in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (77 vs 72). core-js leads in best practices, TTFB.
Choose core-js 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 Optimization Detective when your primary concern is performance and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1555 audited core-js sites and 2 audited Optimization Detective 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