Based on 2504 and 35 real audits
| Metric | Google Tag Manager | Hugo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 40 | 69 | Hugo |
| Accessibility | 88 | 89 | Hugo |
| Best Practices | 86 | 95 | Hugo |
| SEO | 91 | 91 | Tie |
| Security | 65 | 67 | Hugo |
| TTFB | 372ms | 238ms | Hugo |
| Composite | 73 | 77 | Hugo |
Hugo outperforms Google Tag Manager in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (77 vs 73). Google Tag Manager leads in no categories.
Google Tag Manager doesn't clearly lead Hugo in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Choose Hugo when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 2504 audited Google Tag Manager sites and 35 audited Hugo 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