Based on 1841 and 1 real audits
| Metric | core-js | Segment Consent Manager | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 37 | 68 | Segment Consent Manager |
| Accessibility | 88 | 85 | core-js |
| Best Practices | 85 | 96 | Segment Consent Manager |
| SEO | 91 | 92 | Segment Consent Manager |
| Security | 67 | 64 | core-js |
| TTFB | 439ms | 421ms | Segment Consent Manager |
| Composite | 74 | 79 | Segment Consent Manager |
Segment Consent Manager outperforms core-js in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (79 vs 74). core-js leads in accessibility, security.
Choose core-js when your primary concern is accessibility and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Segment Consent Manager when your primary concern is performance and server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1841 audited core-js sites and 1 audited Segment Consent Manager 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