Based on 1905 and 34 real audits
| Metric | Google Analytics | Integral Ad Science | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 41 | 35 | Google Analytics |
| Accessibility | 87 | 88 | Integral Ad Science |
| Best Practices | 85 | 83 | Google Analytics |
| SEO | 91 | 93 | Integral Ad Science |
| Security | 64 | 65 | Integral Ad Science |
| TTFB | 401ms | 274ms | Integral Ad Science |
| Composite | 73 | 72 | Google Analytics |
Integral Ad Science outperforms Google Analytics in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 73). Google Analytics leads in performance, best practices, composite score.
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.
Choose Integral Ad Science when your primary concern is server response time and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 1905 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 →
Send Feedback