| Metric | decimal.js | Swiper | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 23 | 38 | Swiper |
| Accessibility | 81 | 86 | Swiper |
| Best Practices | 79 | 86 | Swiper |
| SEO | 81 | 90 | Swiper |
| Security | 66 | 65 | decimal.js |
| TTFB | 406ms | 412ms | decimal.js |
| Composite | 70 | 73 | Swiper |
Swiper outperforms decimal.js in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 70). decimal.js leads in security, TTFB.
Choose decimal.js when your primary concern is server response time and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Swiper when your primary concern is performance and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 3 audited decimal.js sites and 498 audited Swiper 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