Skip to content

Font Awesome vs Publytics

Based on 629 and 1 real audits

View Font Awesome details | View Publytics details
MetricFont AwesomePublyticsWinner
Performance4544Font Awesome
Accessibility8683Font Awesome
Best Practices8881Font Awesome
SEO9192Publytics
Security6680Publytics
TTFB454ms124msPublytics
Composite7481Publytics
Performance
Font Awesome
45
Publytics
44
Accessibility
Font Awesome
86
Publytics
83
Security
Font Awesome
66
Publytics
80
SEO
Font Awesome
91
Publytics
92
Composite
Font Awesome
74
Publytics
81

Publytics outperforms Font Awesome in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (81 vs 74). Font Awesome leads in performance, accessibility, best practices.

When to choose Font Awesome

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

When to choose Publytics

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 629 audited Font Awesome sites and 1 audited Publytics 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 Publytics?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Font Awesome sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (45 vs 44 on average).
Which has better security, Font Awesome or Publytics?
Publytics sites score higher on security analysis (80 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Font Awesome or Publytics?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Font Awesome (86 vs 83). 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 Publytics?
Publytics 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), Font Awesome or Publytics?
Publytics sites show lower Time to First Byte (124 ms vs 454 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 Publytics 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