Based on 13 and 2556 real audits
| Metric | GOV.UK Frontend | HSTS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 75 | 49 | GOV.UK Frontend |
| Accessibility | 99 | 89 | GOV.UK Frontend |
| Best Practices | 100 | 88 | GOV.UK Frontend |
| SEO | 98 | 91 | GOV.UK Frontend |
| Security | 78 | 70 | GOV.UK Frontend |
| TTFB | 216ms | 364ms | GOV.UK Frontend |
| Composite | 84 | 75 | GOV.UK Frontend |
GOV.UK Frontend outperforms HSTS in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (84 vs 75). HSTS leads in no categories.
Choose GOV.UK Frontend when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
HSTS doesn't clearly lead GOV.UK Frontend 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 13 audited GOV.UK Frontend sites and 2556 audited HSTS 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