Based on 2706 and 270 real audits
| Metric | Google Tag Manager | LazySizes | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 41 | 44 | LazySizes |
| Accessibility | 88 | 86 | Google Tag Manager |
| Best Practices | 87 | 87 | Tie |
| SEO | 91 | 92 | LazySizes |
| Security | 66 | 66 | Tie |
| TTFB | 394ms | 432ms | Google Tag Manager |
| Composite | 73 | 74 | LazySizes |
LazySizes outperforms Google Tag Manager in 3 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (74 vs 73). Google Tag Manager leads in accessibility, TTFB.
Choose Google Tag Manager when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose LazySizes when your primary concern is performance and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 2706 audited Google Tag Manager sites and 270 audited LazySizes 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