Based on 1019 and 15 real audits
| Metric | Google Font API | wpBakery | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 44 | 37 | Google Font API |
| Accessibility | 87 | 86 | Google Font API |
| Best Practices | 86 | 81 | Google Font API |
| SEO | 91 | 91 | Tie |
| Security | 65 | 63 | Google Font API |
| TTFB | 403ms | 747ms | Google Font API |
| Composite | 73 | 73 | Tie |
Google Font API outperforms wpBakery in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 73). wpBakery leads in no categories.
Choose Google Font API when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
wpBakery doesn't clearly lead Google Font API in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Scores are medians across 1019 audited Google Font API sites and 15 audited wpBakery 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