Skip to content

DoubleClick Floodlight vs Lozad.js

Based on 613 and 14 real audits

View DoubleClick Floodlight details | View Lozad.js details
MetricDoubleClick FloodlightLozad.jsWinner
Performance3238Lozad.js
Accessibility8785DoubleClick Floodlight
Best Practices8286Lozad.js
SEO9187DoubleClick Floodlight
Security6465Lozad.js
TTFB367ms477msDoubleClick Floodlight
Composite7272Tie
Performance
DoubleClick Floodlight
32
Lozad.js
38
Accessibility
DoubleClick Floodlight
87
Lozad.js
85
Security
DoubleClick Floodlight
64
Lozad.js
65
SEO
DoubleClick Floodlight
91
Lozad.js
87
Composite
DoubleClick Floodlight
72
Lozad.js
72

DoubleClick Floodlight and Lozad.js are closely matched, each leading in different categories. DoubleClick Floodlight has a composite score of 72 while Lozad.js scores 72.

When to choose DoubleClick Floodlight

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

When to choose Lozad.js

Choose Lozad.js when your primary concern is performance 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 613 audited DoubleClick Floodlight sites and 14 audited Lozad.js 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 →

FAQ

Which is faster, DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Lozad.js sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (38 vs 32 on average).
Which has better security, DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js?
Lozad.js sites score higher on security analysis (65 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor DoubleClick Floodlight (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, DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js?
DoubleClick Floodlight sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 87 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), DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js?
DoubleClick Floodlight sites show lower Time to First Byte (367 ms vs 477 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 DoubleClick Floodlight or Lozad.js for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Lozad.js scores higher on overall composite score while DoubleClick Floodlight 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