Skip to content

Font Awesome vs Joomla

Based on 602 and 16 real audits

View Font Awesome details | View Joomla details
MetricFont AwesomeJoomlaWinner
Performance4560Joomla
Accessibility8784Font Awesome
Best Practices8890Joomla
SEO9191Tie
Security6670Joomla
TTFB476ms426msJoomla
Composite7476Joomla
Performance
Font Awesome
45
Joomla
60
Accessibility
Font Awesome
87
Joomla
84
Security
Font Awesome
66
Joomla
70
SEO
Font Awesome
91
Joomla
91
Composite
Font Awesome
74
Joomla
76

Joomla outperforms Font Awesome in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 74). Font Awesome leads in accessibility.

When to choose Font Awesome

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

When to choose Joomla

Choose Joomla 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 602 audited Font Awesome sites and 16 audited Joomla 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, Font Awesome or Joomla?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Joomla sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (60 vs 45 on average).
Which has better security, Font Awesome or Joomla?
Joomla sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Font Awesome or Joomla?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Font Awesome (87 vs 84). 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, Font Awesome or Joomla?
Font Awesome sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 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), Font Awesome or Joomla?
Joomla sites show lower Time to First Byte (426 ms vs 476 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 Font Awesome or Joomla for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Joomla scores higher on overall composite score while Font Awesome 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