Skip to content

Crazy Egg vs Network for Good

Based on 64 and 2 real audits

View Crazy Egg details | View Network for Good details
MetricCrazy EggNetwork for GoodWinner
Performance3643Network for Good
Accessibility9069Crazy Egg
Best Practices8796Network for Good
SEO9396Network for Good
Security6464Tie
TTFB738ms228msNetwork for Good
Composite7270Crazy Egg
Performance
Crazy Egg
36
Network for Good
43
Accessibility
Crazy Egg
90
Network for Good
69
Security
Crazy Egg
64
Network for Good
64
SEO
Crazy Egg
93
Network for Good
96
Composite
Crazy Egg
72
Network for Good
70

Network for Good outperforms Crazy Egg in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (70 vs 72). Crazy Egg leads in accessibility, composite score.

When to choose Crazy Egg

Choose Crazy Egg when your primary concern is accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Network for Good

Choose Network for Good when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 64 audited Crazy Egg sites and 2 audited Network for Good 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, Crazy Egg or Network for Good?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Network for Good sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (43 vs 36 on average).
Which has better security, Crazy Egg or Network for Good?
Crazy Egg sites score higher on security analysis (64 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Crazy Egg or Network for Good?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Crazy Egg (90 vs 69). 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, Crazy Egg or Network for Good?
Network for Good sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (96 vs 93 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), Crazy Egg or Network for Good?
Network for Good sites show lower Time to First Byte (228 ms vs 738 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 Crazy Egg or Network for Good for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Network for Good scores higher on overall composite score while Crazy Egg 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