| Metric | GitHub Pages | HSTS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 76 | 48 | GitHub Pages |
| Accessibility | 89 | 89 | Tie |
| Best Practices | 95 | 88 | GitHub Pages |
| SEO | 96 | 91 | GitHub Pages |
| Security | 64 | 69 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 158ms | 355ms | GitHub Pages |
| Composite | 78 | 75 | GitHub Pages |
GitHub Pages outperforms HSTS in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (78 vs 75). HSTS leads in security.
Choose GitHub Pages when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose HSTS when your primary concern is security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 29 audited GitHub Pages sites and 2490 audited HSTS 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 →
Send Feedback