Based on 575 and 1 real audits
| Metric | Font Awesome | metisMenu | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 44 | 93 | metisMenu |
| Accessibility | 87 | 85 | Font Awesome |
| Best Practices | 87 | 100 | metisMenu |
| SEO | 91 | 83 | Font Awesome |
| Security | 65 | 73 | metisMenu |
| TTFB | 453ms | 359ms | metisMenu |
| Composite | 73 | 84 | metisMenu |
metisMenu outperforms Font Awesome in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (84 vs 73). Font Awesome leads in accessibility, SEO.
Choose Font Awesome when your primary concern is SEO and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose metisMenu when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 575 audited Font Awesome sites and 1 audited metisMenu 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