| Metric | Goftino | HTTP/3 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 55 | 52 | Goftino |
| Accessibility | 93 | 88 | Goftino |
| Best Practices | 96 | 88 | Goftino |
| SEO | 100 | 91 | Goftino |
| Security | 76 | 70 | Goftino |
| TTFB | 1344ms | 321ms | HTTP/3 |
| Composite | 78 | 76 | Goftino |
Goftino outperforms HTTP/3 in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (78 vs 76). HTTP/3 leads in TTFB.
Choose Goftino when your primary concern is SEO and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose HTTP/3 when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 2 audited Goftino sites and 1646 audited HTTP/3 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