Skip to content

HSTS vs Paper.js

Based on 3295 and 3 real audits

View HSTS details | View Paper.js details
MetricHSTSPaper.jsWinner
Performance5233HSTS
Accessibility9087HSTS
Best Practices8975HSTS
SEO9292Tie
Security7366HSTS
TTFB403ms347msPaper.js
Composite7871HSTS
Performance
HSTS
52
Paper.js
33
Accessibility
HSTS
90
Paper.js
87
Security
HSTS
73
Paper.js
66
SEO
HSTS
92
Paper.js
92
Composite
HSTS
78
Paper.js
71

HSTS outperforms Paper.js in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (78 vs 71). Paper.js leads in TTFB.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Paper.js

Choose Paper.js 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 3295 audited HSTS sites and 3 audited Paper.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 Paper.js?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (52 vs 33 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Paper.js?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (73 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Paper.js?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (90 vs 87). 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 Paper.js?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (92 vs 92 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 Paper.js?
Paper.js sites show lower Time to First Byte (347 ms vs 403 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 Paper.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