Skip to content

Deno vs HSTS

Based on 1 and 2601 real audits

View Deno details | View HSTS details
MetricDenoHSTSWinner
Performance4147HSTS
Accessibility8988Deno
Best Practices10087Deno
SEO9290Deno
Security7170Deno
TTFB855ms364msHSTS
Composite7675Deno
Performance
Deno
41
HSTS
47
Accessibility
Deno
89
HSTS
88
Security
Deno
71
HSTS
70
SEO
Deno
92
HSTS
90
Composite
Deno
76
HSTS
75

Deno outperforms HSTS in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 75). HSTS leads in performance, TTFB.

When to choose Deno

Choose Deno when your primary concern is best practices and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose HSTS

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 1 audited Deno sites and 2601 audited HSTS 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, Deno or HSTS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (47 vs 41 on average).
Which has better security, Deno or HSTS?
Deno sites score higher on security analysis (71 vs 70 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Deno or HSTS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Deno (89 vs 88). 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, Deno or HSTS?
Deno sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 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), Deno or HSTS?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (364 ms vs 855 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 Deno or HSTS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HSTS scores higher on overall composite score while Deno 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