CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites Q2 2026 edition · All devices field outcomes
Metric TTFB LCP INP CLS FCP
1

At a glance the headline numbers for CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

88.3%
Best: Vercel
good TTFB
55.9%
Most used: No CDN (origin)
good TTFB
48.2%
Worst: Netlify
good TTFB

Vercel passes TTFB most often of any CDN. 88.3% of its sites pass. Netlify passes least at 48.2%. No CDN (origin) (the most-used CDN) sits at 55.9%. The gap is 40 percentage points.

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

The ranking sorted by TTFB at p75, fastest first

# CDN TTFB p75 Passing Sites
1 Vercel 561ms 88.3%
980
2 Fastly 867ms 72.4%
6,437
3 Cloudflare 950ms 69.0%
23,785
4 Netlify 1.1s 48.2%
343
5 CloudFront 1.1s 62.1%
6,141
6 Akamai 1.1s 59.5%
4,955
7 No CDN (origin) 1.3s 55.9%
142,621
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing TTFB per CDN which group passes the TTFB most often

CDNSitesPassing TTFBp75
Vercel 0.5% 980 88% 561ms
Fastly 3.4% 6,437 72% 867ms
Cloudflare 12.5% 23,785 69% 950ms
CloudFront 3.2% 6,141 62% 1.1s
Akamai 2.6% 4,955 60% 1.1s
No CDN (origin) 75.1% 142,621 56% 1.3s
Netlify 0.2% 343 48% 1.1s
Good Needs Improvement Poor Sorted best-passing first · median colored by its own rating · pass = good TTFB (800ms at p75) · one value per site

88% of Vercel sites pass TTFB. Netlify trails 40 points behind, leaving 52% of its sites failing. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

All five vitals at once the whole category without toggling - cell is the pass rate, small number the p75

LCP
INP
CLS
FCP
TTFB
No CDN (origin) 75.1%
822.2s
95106ms
880.03
751.8s
561.3s
Cloudflare 12.5%
862.0s
94117ms
880.04
821.6s
69950ms
Fastly 3.4%
862.0s
94104ms
880.02
831.5s
72867ms
CloudFront 3.2%
812.3s
91136ms
780.09
771.7s
621.1s
Akamai 2.6%
832.1s
97110ms
860.04
791.7s
601.1s
Vercel 0.5%
822.2s
91150ms
840.05
791.7s
88561ms
Netlify 0.2%
782.4s
75217ms
690.17
761.8s
481.1s
60%95%+ passing Cell: pass rate, small number = p75 · faded rows: under 100 sites

One row per CDN, one column per vital - the cell is the share of sites passing, the small number the p75. No toggling needed to see where the category actually differs.

Vercel leads on TTFB: 88% of its sites pass. Netlify trails at 48%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
5

Why this matters for the Core Web Vitals, and where to start fixing it

A CDN sits between your server and your visitors, serving content from a location near each of them instead of from a single origin. That shortens the trip every request makes, which shows up first in Time to First Byte and then in how quickly the main content can paint. A good CDN also handles caching, compression and modern protocols, so the gains reach well beyond raw distance.

Start by making sure the CDN is actually caching your pages and assets rather than passing everything through to the origin. Turn on compression and HTTP/2 or HTTP/3, set sensible cache headers, and check that your largest image is served from the edge. A CDN that passes every request through to the origin gives you almost none of this.

How does your CDN affect Core Web Vitals?

Among the most-used CDNs, Vercel reaches a good TTFB on 88.3% of sites; No CDN (origin) on 55.9%.

Related signals CMS (11) → Frameworks (11) → Chrome field data from 189,915 sites, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured