Skip to content

Fathom vs Ortto

Based on 17 and 1 real audits

View Fathom details | View Ortto details
MetricFathomOrttoWinner
Performance5835Fathom
Accessibility9099Ortto
Best Practices9277Fathom
SEO97100Ortto
Security6265Ortto
TTFB317ms104msOrtto
Composite7675Fathom
Performance
Fathom
58
Ortto
35
Accessibility
Fathom
90
Ortto
99
Security
Fathom
62
Ortto
65
SEO
Fathom
97
Ortto
100
Composite
Fathom
76
Ortto
75

Ortto outperforms Fathom in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 76). Fathom leads in performance, best practices, composite score.

When to choose Fathom

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

When to choose Ortto

Choose Ortto 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 17 audited Fathom sites and 1 audited Ortto 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, Fathom or Ortto?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Fathom sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (58 vs 35 on average).
Which has better security, Fathom or Ortto?
Ortto sites score higher on security analysis (65 vs 62 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Fathom or Ortto?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Ortto (99 vs 90). 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, Fathom or Ortto?
Ortto sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 vs 97 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), Fathom or Ortto?
Ortto sites show lower Time to First Byte (104 ms vs 317 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 Fathom or Ortto for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Fathom scores higher on overall composite score while Fathom 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