| Metric | HSTS | Lodash | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 48 | 37 | HSTS |
| Accessibility | 89 | 86 | HSTS |
| Best Practices | 87 | 85 | HSTS |
| SEO | 91 | 90 | HSTS |
| Security | 69 | 65 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 354ms | 440ms | HSTS |
| Composite | 75 | 72 | HSTS |
HSTS outperforms Lodash in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 72). Lodash leads in no categories.
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.
Lodash doesn't clearly lead HSTS 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 2489 audited HSTS sites and 217 audited Lodash 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