Skip to content

HSTS vs Lunr.js

Based on 2907 and 2 real audits

View HSTS details | View Lunr.js details
MetricHSTSLunr.jsWinner
Performance5158Lunr.js
Accessibility8985HSTS
Best Practices8896Lunr.js
SEO9184HSTS
Security7275Lunr.js
TTFB373ms388msHSTS
Composite7675HSTS
Performance
HSTS
51
Lunr.js
58
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Lunr.js
85
Security
HSTS
72
Lunr.js
75
SEO
HSTS
91
Lunr.js
84
Composite
HSTS
76
Lunr.js
75

HSTS outperforms Lunr.js in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 75). Lunr.js leads in performance, best practices, security.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Lunr.js

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2907 audited HSTS sites and 2 audited Lunr.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 →

Small sample: one or both technologies have fewer than 10 audited sites. Treat these numbers as directional — medians stabilize around 20–30 audits per side.

FAQ

Which is faster, HSTS or Lunr.js?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Lunr.js sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (58 vs 51 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Lunr.js?
Lunr.js sites score higher on security analysis (75 vs 72 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Lunr.js?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 85). 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 Lunr.js?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 84 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 Lunr.js?
HSTS sites show lower Time to First Byte (373 ms vs 388 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 Lunr.js for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Lunr.js 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