Skip to content

HSTS vs HTTP/3

Based on 2531 and 1485 real audits

View HSTS details | View HTTP/3 details
MetricHSTSHTTP/3Winner
Performance4851HTTP/3
Accessibility8988HSTS
Best Practices8788HTTP/3
SEO9190HSTS
Security7069HSTS
TTFB362ms297msHTTP/3
Composite7575Tie
Performance
HSTS
48
HTTP/3
51
Accessibility
HSTS
89
HTTP/3
88
Security
HSTS
70
HTTP/3
69
SEO
HSTS
91
HTTP/3
90
Composite
HSTS
75
HTTP/3
75

HSTS and HTTP/3 are closely matched, each leading in different categories. HSTS has a composite score of 75 while HTTP/3 scores 75.

When to choose HSTS

Choose HSTS when your primary concern is accessibility and SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose HTTP/3

Choose HTTP/3 when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2531 audited HSTS sites and 1485 audited HTTP/3 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 →

FAQ

Which is faster, HSTS or HTTP/3?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HTTP/3 sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (51 vs 48 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or HTTP/3?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 69 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or HTTP/3?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 88). Both technologies can be made fully accessible with care — the difference reflects common patterns in the sampled sites, not inherent platform limits.
Which is better for SEO, HSTS or HTTP/3?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 90 on average), which cover meta tags, crawlability, mobile friendliness, and structured data. Content strategy and backlinks still matter more than platform choice for ranking.
Which has faster server response (TTFB), HSTS or HTTP/3?
HTTP/3 sites show lower Time to First Byte (297 ms vs 362 ms on average). TTFB depends heavily on hosting and CDN setup rather than the technology itself, but the sampled sites suggest a meaningful difference in common deployment patterns.
Should I choose HSTS or HTTP/3 for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HTTP/3 scores higher on overall composite score while HSTS may excel in metrics you care about most. Run a free BeaverCheck audit on a real site using each to compare the metrics relevant to your use case.
Audit your own site

Send Feedback