Skip to content

HSTS vs Lozad.js

Based on 2556 and 12 real audits

View HSTS details | View Lozad.js details
MetricHSTSLozad.jsWinner
Performance4940HSTS
Accessibility8986HSTS
Best Practices8886HSTS
SEO9187HSTS
Security7064HSTS
TTFB364ms441msHSTS
Composite7571HSTS
Performance
HSTS
49
Lozad.js
40
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Lozad.js
86
Security
HSTS
70
Lozad.js
64
SEO
HSTS
91
Lozad.js
87
Composite
HSTS
75
Lozad.js
71

HSTS outperforms Lozad.js in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 71). Lozad.js leads in no categories.

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 Lozad.js

Lozad.js 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.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2556 audited HSTS sites and 12 audited Lozad.js 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 Lozad.js?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (49 vs 40 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Lozad.js?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Lozad.js?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 86). 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 Lozad.js?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 87 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 Lozad.js?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (364 ms vs 441 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 Lozad.js 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