Based on 2488 and 134 real audits
| Metric | HSTS | Matomo Analytics | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 48 | 52 | Matomo Analytics |
| Accessibility | 89 | 88 | HSTS |
| Best Practices | 87 | 89 | Matomo Analytics |
| SEO | 91 | 90 | HSTS |
| Security | 69 | 65 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 354ms | 430ms | HSTS |
| Composite | 75 | 74 | HSTS |
HSTS outperforms Matomo Analytics in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 74). Matomo Analytics leads in performance, best practices.
Choose HSTS when your primary concern is server response time and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Matomo Analytics when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 2488 audited HSTS sites and 134 audited Matomo Analytics 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