Based on 106 and 3 real audits
| Metric | Google Sign-in | Paper.js | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 33 | 33 | Tie |
| Accessibility | 89 | 87 | Google Sign-in |
| Best Practices | 82 | 75 | Google Sign-in |
| SEO | 91 | 92 | Paper.js |
| Security | 64 | 66 | Paper.js |
| TTFB | 285ms | 347ms | Google Sign-in |
| Composite | 72 | 71 | Google Sign-in |
Google Sign-in outperforms Paper.js in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (72 vs 71). Paper.js leads in SEO, security.
Choose Google Sign-in when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Paper.js when your primary concern is security and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 106 audited Google Sign-in sites and 3 audited Paper.js 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