Based on 2550 and 218 real audits
| Metric | Microsoft | Underscore.js | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 40 | 40 | Tie |
| Accessibility | 89 | 88 | Microsoft |
| Best Practices | 86 | 85 | Microsoft |
| SEO | 89 | 91 | Underscore.js |
| Security | 67 | 67 | Tie |
| TTFB | 336ms | 477ms | Microsoft |
| Composite | 73 | 74 | Underscore.js |
Microsoft outperforms Underscore.js in 3 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (73 vs 74). Underscore.js leads in SEO, composite score.
Choose Microsoft when your primary concern is server response time and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Choose Underscore.js when your primary concern is SEO. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
Scores are medians across 2550 audited Microsoft sites and 218 audited Underscore.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 →
Send Feedback