| Metric | mod_wsgi | OpenSSL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 73 | 45 | mod_wsgi |
| Accessibility | 89 | 86 | mod_wsgi |
| Best Practices | 98 | 85 | mod_wsgi |
| SEO | 91 | 90 | mod_wsgi |
| Security | 66 | 64 | mod_wsgi |
| TTFB | 211ms | 524ms | mod_wsgi |
| Composite | 75 | 72 | mod_wsgi |
mod_wsgi outperforms OpenSSL in 7 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (75 vs 72). OpenSSL leads in no categories.
Choose mod_wsgi when your primary concern is server response time and performance. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.
OpenSSL doesn't clearly lead mod_wsgi 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 2 audited mod_wsgi sites and 45 audited OpenSSL 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.
Send Feedback