| Metric | HSTS | web-vitals | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 53 | 37 | HSTS |
| Accessibility | 90 | 89 | HSTS |
| Best Practices | 89 | 84 | HSTS |
| SEO | 91 | 90 | HSTS |
| Security | 74 | 66 | HSTS |
| TTFB | 410ms | 415ms | HSTS |
| Composite | 78 | 73 | HSTS |
HSTS outperforms web-vitals in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (78 vs 73). web-vitals leads in no categories.
Choose HSTS when your primary concern is performance and security. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
web-vitals doesn't clearly lead HSTS in any category on the sampled sites — pick it based on developer experience, ecosystem, or existing team skills rather than the audit scores.
Scores are medians across 3370 audited HSTS sites and 157 audited web-vitals 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