Skip to content

HSTS vs Microsoft

Based on 2532 and 2416 real audits

View HSTS details | View Microsoft details
MetricHSTSMicrosoftWinner
Performance4839HSTS
Accessibility8989Tie
Best Practices8786HSTS
SEO9189HSTS
Security7066HSTS
TTFB362ms329msMicrosoft
Composite7572HSTS
Performance
HSTS
48
Microsoft
39
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Microsoft
89
Security
HSTS
70
Microsoft
66
SEO
HSTS
91
Microsoft
89
Composite
HSTS
75
Microsoft
72

HSTS outperforms Microsoft in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 72). Microsoft leads in TTFB.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Microsoft

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2532 audited HSTS sites and 2416 audited Microsoft 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 Microsoft?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (48 vs 39 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Microsoft?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Microsoft?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 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 Microsoft?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 89 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 Microsoft?
Microsoft sites show lower Time to First Byte (329 ms vs 362 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 Microsoft 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