Skip to content

DoubleClick Floodlight vs Microsoft

Based on 594 and 2412 real audits

View DoubleClick Floodlight details | View Microsoft details
MetricDoubleClick FloodlightMicrosoftWinner
Performance3239Microsoft
Accessibility8789Microsoft
Best Practices8186Microsoft
SEO9189DoubleClick Floodlight
Security6466Microsoft
TTFB340ms329msMicrosoft
Composite7272Tie
Performance
DoubleClick Floodlight
32
Microsoft
39
Accessibility
DoubleClick Floodlight
87
Microsoft
89
Security
DoubleClick Floodlight
64
Microsoft
66
SEO
DoubleClick Floodlight
91
Microsoft
89
Composite
DoubleClick Floodlight
72
Microsoft
72

Microsoft outperforms DoubleClick Floodlight in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 72). DoubleClick Floodlight leads in SEO.

When to choose DoubleClick Floodlight

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

When to choose Microsoft

Choose Microsoft 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 594 audited DoubleClick Floodlight sites and 2412 audited Microsoft 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 Microsoft?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Microsoft sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (39 vs 32 on average).
Which has better security, DoubleClick Floodlight or Microsoft?
Microsoft sites score higher on security analysis (66 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, DoubleClick Floodlight or Microsoft?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Microsoft (89 vs 87). 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 Microsoft?
DoubleClick Floodlight sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 89 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 Microsoft?
Microsoft sites show lower Time to First Byte (329 ms vs 340 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 Microsoft for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Microsoft 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