Skip to content

OpenX vs Rubicon Project

Based on 51 and 28 real audits

View OpenX details | View Rubicon Project details
MetricOpenXRubicon ProjectWinner
Performance2730Rubicon Project
Accessibility8585Tie
Best Practices7677Rubicon Project
SEO9091Rubicon Project
Security6464Tie
TTFB341ms347msOpenX
Composite7171Tie
Performance
OpenX
27
Rubicon Project
30
Accessibility
OpenX
85
Rubicon Project
85
Security
OpenX
64
Rubicon Project
64
SEO
OpenX
90
Rubicon Project
91
Composite
OpenX
71
Rubicon Project
71

Rubicon Project outperforms OpenX in 3 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (71 vs 71). OpenX leads in TTFB.

When to choose OpenX

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

When to choose Rubicon Project

Choose Rubicon Project when your primary concern is performance and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 51 audited OpenX sites and 28 audited Rubicon Project 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, OpenX or Rubicon Project?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Rubicon Project sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (30 vs 27 on average).
Which has better security, OpenX or Rubicon Project?
OpenX sites score higher on security analysis (64 vs 64 on average).
Which has better accessibility, OpenX or Rubicon Project?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor OpenX (85 vs 85). 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, OpenX or Rubicon Project?
Rubicon Project sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 90 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), OpenX or Rubicon Project?
OpenX sites show lower Time to First Byte (341 ms vs 347 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 OpenX or Rubicon Project for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Rubicon Project scores higher on overall composite score while OpenX 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