Skip to content

core-js vs Re:amaze

Based on 1902 and 1 real audits

View core-js details | View Re:amaze details
Metriccore-jsRe:amazeWinner
Performance3630core-js
Accessibility8785core-js
Best Practices8596Re:amaze
SEO90100Re:amaze
Security6785Re:amaze
TTFB442ms102msRe:amaze
Composite7482Re:amaze
Performance
core-js
36
Re:amaze
30
Accessibility
core-js
87
Re:amaze
85
Security
core-js
67
Re:amaze
85
SEO
core-js
90
Re:amaze
100
Composite
core-js
74
Re:amaze
82

Re:amaze outperforms core-js in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (82 vs 74). core-js leads in performance, accessibility.

When to choose core-js

Choose core-js when your primary concern is performance and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Re:amaze

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 1902 audited core-js sites and 1 audited Re:amaze 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, core-js or Re:amaze?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, core-js sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (36 vs 30 on average).
Which has better security, core-js or Re:amaze?
Re:amaze sites score higher on security analysis (85 vs 67 on average).
Which has better accessibility, core-js or Re:amaze?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor core-js (87 vs 85). 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, core-js or Re:amaze?
Re:amaze sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 90 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), core-js or Re:amaze?
Re:amaze sites show lower Time to First Byte (102 ms vs 442 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 core-js or Re:amaze for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. core-js scores higher on overall composite score while core-js 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