Every page builder likes to make claims that they’re the fastest. But in controlled tests, it’s easy to optimize conditions and make any builder look good.
The real question is: how do they perform on real-world websites in the wild?
Curious to know the answer myself, I tested over 150 agency websites. I ran Lighthouse performance audits on each site, noted which page builder was used, and analyzed the results to see which builders deliver consistent performance (and which ones struggle).
Caveats
I can be described as a lot of things, but a data scientist is not one of them. So, to be as transparent as possible, here are a few things to note about this “study”.
- While I tested over 150 agency sites (from our directory), I only included the data for builders that had at least 5 entries.
- I realize you can make any builder faster or slower depending on a ton of factors that aren’t included in this study, like hosting, video embeds, chat widgets, if they’re using caching or optimization plugins (like Perfmatters), etc.
- I chose to use agency websites because (a) I had access to them, and (b), it’s reasonable to assume they know the (relative) importance of website performance.
- Due to all the variables, I think the results say as much about the users of these builders as they do the builders themselves.
The Data
Later in this article I’ll share some of the insights I pulled from this data, but for now, here’s everything I collected (in alphabetical order by builder):
| Builder | # of Sites Tested | Mean Score | Median Score | Minimum Score | Maximum Score | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bricks | 20 | 76 | 77 | 38 | 97 | 59 |
| Divi | 25 | 64 | 62 | 50 | 98 | 48 |
| Kadence | 11 | 69 | 76 | 34 | 82 | 48 |
| GenerateBlocks | 14 | 88 | 90 | 60 | 100 | 40 |
| Elementor | 30 | 67 | 66 | 49 | 88 | 39 |
| Beaver Builder | 16 | 69 | 70 | 55 | 91 | 36 |
| Gutenberg | 6 | 70 | 69 | 56 | 89 | 33 |
| Oxygen | 5 | 78 | 82 | 56 | 87 | 91 |
Some Analysis
In order over median score (the middle value in a set of numbers), here’s how the builders stack up:
- GenerateBlocks
- Oxygen
- Bricks
- Kadence
- Beaver Builder
- Gutenberg
- Elementor
- Divi
If we switch to the average or “mean” score, we see only slight shifts in the order:
- GenerateBlocks
- Oxygen
- Bricks
- Gutenberg
- Beaver Builder
- Kadence
- Elementor
- Divi
We see Kadence shift from #4 to #6, suggesting there is more variance in the performance numbers depending on the site/developer.
To dig deeper into that, I wanted to see the delta, or the gap between the highest and lowest scores. The idea being, a bigger delta means that the results are less consistent.
Here’s a list of the builders in order of lowest delta (most consistent) to the highest delta:
- Oxygen
- Gutenberg
- Beaver Builder
- Elementor
- GenerateBlocks
- Divi
- Kadence
- Bricks
It’s interesting to see how much different the order is when looking at the delta. Builders with a high median and low delta (like GenerateBlocks and Oxygen) have the best consistent performance.
Builders with a mid-level median and low delta (like Gutenberg and Beaver Builder) aren’t going to blow your socks off, but are less likely to tank your scores.
Whereas something like Bricks (which is known for giving the user a lot of control) has a lot of inconsistency — which we can assume has more to do with the developer than the builder itself, since we know it’s capable of high scores. However, Oxygen provides a ton of flexibility, and performed great, so who knows 😅.
What this could mean…
If you’re trying to pick a builder with performance in mind, here’s what you need to know:
If you want the best shot at high performance with minimal effort, go with GenerateBlocks or Oxygen. These builders consistently scored at the top, with Oxygen showing the most stable performance across all tests. GenerateBlocks had the highest average and median scores, meaning even if you don’t obsess over optimization, you’re likely to get solid results.
Bricks, Kadence, and Divi showed the biggest swings in performance. Bricks, in particular, had some of the highest highs and lowest lows — suggesting that while it can be lightning fast, it depends heavily on how well the developer optimizes it. Kadence was another surprise, landing lower than expected in both median and average scores.
If you’re using Divi or Elementor, expect an uphill battle. These builders consistently landed at the bottom, meaning if you’re using them, you’re starting at a disadvantage. That’s not to say you can’t build a fast site with them, but it’s going to take more work, more optimizations, and more compromises.
Performance isn’t just about the builder — it’s about how you use it.
If you’re serious about performance, start with a builder that gives you an advantage from day one. If you prefer to work with builders that scored lower on this list, just know that you’ll need to put in the extra effort to keep things running smoothly.
Kyle Van Deusen
After spending 15 years as a graphic designer and earning a business degree, I launched my agency, OGAL Web Design, in 2017. A year later, after finding the amazing community around WordPress, I co-found The Admin Bar, which has grown to become the #1 community for WordPress professionals. I'm a husband and proud father of three, and a resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
