Skip to content

Microsoft vs Mimecast

Based on 2421 and 145 real audits

View Microsoft details | View Mimecast details
MetricMicrosoftMimecastWinner
Performance3938Microsoft
Accessibility8990Mimecast
Best Practices8687Mimecast
SEO8986Microsoft
Security6666Tie
TTFB329ms255msMimecast
Composite7273Mimecast
Performance
Microsoft
39
Mimecast
38
Accessibility
Microsoft
89
Mimecast
90
Security
Microsoft
66
Mimecast
66
SEO
Microsoft
89
Mimecast
86
Composite
Microsoft
72
Mimecast
73

Mimecast outperforms Microsoft in 4 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 72). Microsoft leads in performance, SEO.

When to choose Microsoft

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

When to choose Mimecast

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

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 2421 audited Microsoft sites and 145 audited Mimecast 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, Microsoft or Mimecast?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Microsoft sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (39 vs 38 on average).
Which has better security, Microsoft or Mimecast?
Microsoft sites score higher on security analysis (66 vs 66 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Microsoft or Mimecast?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Mimecast (90 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, Microsoft or Mimecast?
Microsoft sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (89 vs 86 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), Microsoft or Mimecast?
Mimecast sites show lower Time to First Byte (255 ms vs 329 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 Microsoft or Mimecast for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Microsoft scores higher on overall composite score while Microsoft 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