Skip to content

HSTS vs Impact

Based on 2556 and 27 real audits

View HSTS details | View Impact details
MetricHSTSImpactWinner
Performance4927HSTS
Accessibility8989Tie
Best Practices8881HSTS
SEO9191Tie
Security7066HSTS
TTFB364ms218msImpact
Composite7572HSTS
Performance
HSTS
49
Impact
27
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Impact
89
Security
HSTS
70
Impact
66
SEO
HSTS
91
Impact
91
Composite
HSTS
75
Impact
72

HSTS outperforms Impact in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 72). Impact leads in TTFB.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Impact

Choose Impact when your primary concern is server response time. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2556 audited HSTS sites and 27 audited Impact 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 Impact?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (49 vs 27 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Impact?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Impact?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 89). 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 Impact?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 91 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 Impact?
Impact sites show lower Time to First Byte (218 ms vs 364 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 Impact for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. HSTS 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