Skip to content

Font Awesome vs Kentico CMS

Based on 559 and 7 real audits

View Font Awesome details | View Kentico CMS details
MetricFont AwesomeKentico CMSWinner
Performance4440Font Awesome
Accessibility8788Kentico CMS
Best Practices8784Font Awesome
SEO9187Font Awesome
Security6563Font Awesome
TTFB456ms244msKentico CMS
Composite7372Font Awesome
Performance
Font Awesome
44
Kentico CMS
40
Accessibility
Font Awesome
87
Kentico CMS
88
Security
Font Awesome
65
Kentico CMS
63
SEO
Font Awesome
91
Kentico CMS
87
Composite
Font Awesome
73
Kentico CMS
72

Font Awesome outperforms Kentico CMS in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 72). Kentico CMS leads in accessibility, TTFB.

When to choose Font Awesome

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

When to choose Kentico CMS

Choose Kentico CMS 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 559 audited Font Awesome sites and 7 audited Kentico CMS 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, Font Awesome or Kentico CMS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Font Awesome sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (44 vs 40 on average).
Which has better security, Font Awesome or Kentico CMS?
Font Awesome sites score higher on security analysis (65 vs 63 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Font Awesome or Kentico CMS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Kentico CMS (88 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, Font Awesome or Kentico CMS?
Font Awesome sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 87 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 Kentico CMS?
Kentico CMS sites show lower Time to First Byte (244 ms vs 456 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 Kentico CMS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Font Awesome 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