Skip to content

FancyBox vs Q4

Based on 112 and 1 real audits

View FancyBox details | View Q4 details
MetricFancyBoxQ4Winner
Performance5145FancyBox
Accessibility82100Q4
Best Practices8992Q4
SEO9192Q4
Security6363Tie
TTFB719ms270msQ4
Composite7375Q4
Performance
FancyBox
51
Q4
45
Accessibility
FancyBox
82
Q4
100
Security
FancyBox
63
Q4
63
SEO
FancyBox
91
Q4
92
Composite
FancyBox
73
Q4
75

Q4 outperforms FancyBox in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 73). FancyBox leads in performance.

When to choose FancyBox

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

When to choose Q4

Choose Q4 when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 112 audited FancyBox sites and 1 audited Q4 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, FancyBox or Q4?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, FancyBox sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (51 vs 45 on average).
Which has better security, FancyBox or Q4?
FancyBox sites score higher on security analysis (63 vs 63 on average).
Which has better accessibility, FancyBox or Q4?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Q4 (100 vs 82). 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, FancyBox or Q4?
Q4 sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 vs 91 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), FancyBox or Q4?
Q4 sites show lower Time to First Byte (270 ms vs 719 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 FancyBox or Q4 for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. FancyBox scores higher on overall composite score while FancyBox 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