Skip to content

HSTS vs IPFS

Based on 2488 and 28 real audits

View HSTS details | View IPFS details
MetricHSTSIPFSWinner
Performance4875IPFS
Accessibility8995IPFS
Best Practices8773HSTS
SEO91100IPFS
Security6982IPFS
TTFB354ms125msIPFS
Composite7587IPFS
Performance
HSTS
48
IPFS
75
Accessibility
HSTS
89
IPFS
95
Security
HSTS
69
IPFS
82
SEO
HSTS
91
IPFS
100
Composite
HSTS
75
IPFS
87

IPFS outperforms HSTS in 6 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (87 vs 75). HSTS leads in best practices.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose IPFS

Choose IPFS 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 2488 audited HSTS sites and 28 audited IPFS 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 IPFS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, IPFS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (75 vs 48 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or IPFS?
IPFS sites score higher on security analysis (82 vs 69 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or IPFS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor IPFS (95 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 IPFS?
IPFS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (100 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 IPFS?
IPFS sites show lower Time to First Byte (125 ms vs 354 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 IPFS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. IPFS 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