Skip to content

HSTS vs Pure CSS

Based on 2556 and 7 real audits

View HSTS details | View Pure CSS details
MetricHSTSPure CSSWinner
Performance4958Pure CSS
Accessibility8982HSTS
Best Practices8895Pure CSS
SEO9191Tie
Security7067HSTS
TTFB364ms274msPure CSS
Composite7574HSTS
Performance
HSTS
49
Pure CSS
58
Accessibility
HSTS
89
Pure CSS
82
Security
HSTS
70
Pure CSS
67
SEO
HSTS
91
Pure CSS
91
Composite
HSTS
75
Pure CSS
74

HSTS and Pure CSS are closely matched, each leading in different categories. HSTS has a composite score of 75 while Pure CSS scores 74.

When to choose HSTS

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

When to choose Pure CSS

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2556 audited HSTS sites and 7 audited Pure CSS 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 Pure CSS?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Pure CSS sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (58 vs 49 on average).
Which has better security, HSTS or Pure CSS?
HSTS sites score higher on security analysis (70 vs 67 on average).
Which has better accessibility, HSTS or Pure CSS?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor HSTS (89 vs 82). 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 Pure CSS?
HSTS sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 91 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 Pure CSS?
Pure CSS sites show lower Time to First Byte (274 ms vs 364 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 Pure CSS for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Pure CSS 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