Skip to content

HSTS vs Kestrel

Based on 2556 and 15 real audits

View HSTS details | View Kestrel details
MetricHSTSKestrelWinner
Performance4939HSTS
Accessibility8994Kestrel
Best Practices8880HSTS
SEO9193Kestrel
Security7065HSTS
TTFB364ms385msHSTS
Composite7573HSTS
Performance
HSTS
49
Kestrel
39
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Kestrel
94
Security
HSTS
70
Kestrel
65
SEO
HSTS
91
Kestrel
93
Composite
HSTS
75
Kestrel
73

HSTS outperforms Kestrel in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 73). Kestrel leads in accessibility, SEO.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Kestrel

Choose Kestrel when your primary concern is accessibility and SEO. 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 15 audited Kestrel 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 Kestrel?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (49 vs 39 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Kestrel?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 65 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Kestrel?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Kestrel (94 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 Kestrel?
Kestrel sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (93 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 Kestrel?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (364 ms vs 385 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 Kestrel 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