Skip to content

Google Analytics vs Integral Ad Science

Based on 2272 and 34 real audits

View Google Analytics details | View Integral Ad Science details
MetricGoogle AnalyticsIntegral Ad ScienceWinner
Performance4235Google Analytics
Accessibility8788Integral Ad Science
Best Practices8683Google Analytics
SEO9293Integral Ad Science
Security6765Google Analytics
TTFB441ms274msIntegral Ad Science
Composite7472Google Analytics
Performance
Google Analytics
42
Integral Ad Science
35
Accessibility
Google Analytics
87
Integral Ad Science
88
Security
Google Analytics
67
Integral Ad Science
65
SEO
Google Analytics
92
Integral Ad Science
93
Composite
Google Analytics
74
Integral Ad Science
72

Google Analytics outperforms Integral Ad Science in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (74 vs 72). Integral Ad Science leads in accessibility, SEO, TTFB.

When to choose Google Analytics

Choose Google Analytics when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Integral Ad Science

Choose Integral Ad Science 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 2272 audited Google Analytics sites and 34 audited Integral Ad Science 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 →

FAQ

Which is faster, Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Google Analytics sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (42 vs 35 on average).
Which has better security, Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science?
Google Analytics sites score higher on security analysis (67 vs 65 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Integral Ad Science (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, Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science?
Integral Ad Science sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (93 vs 92 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), Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science?
Integral Ad Science sites show lower Time to First Byte (274 ms vs 441 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 Google Analytics or Integral Ad Science for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Google Analytics scores higher on overall composite score while Google Analytics 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