Based on 6 and 775 real audits
| Metric | EWWW Image Optimizer | WordPress | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 53 | 46 | EWWW Image Optimizer |
| Accessibility | 88 | 88 | Tie |
| Best Practices | 79 | 86 | WordPress |
| SEO | 92 | 91 | EWWW Image Optimizer |
| Security | 67 | 66 | EWWW Image Optimizer |
| TTFB | 421ms | 366ms | WordPress |
| Composite | 76 | 74 | EWWW Image Optimizer |
EWWW Image Optimizer outperforms WordPress in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 74). WordPress leads in best practices, TTFB.
Choose EWWW Image Optimizer when your primary concern is performance and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose WordPress when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 6 audited EWWW Image Optimizer sites and 775 audited WordPress 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