CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

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

At a glance the headline numbers for CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

89.5%
Best: No CDN (origin)
good CLS
88.0%
Typical CDN
good CLS
64.8%
Worst: Netlify
good CLS

No CDN (origin) passes CLS most often of any CDN. 89.5% of its sites pass. Netlify passes least at 64.8%. The gap is 25 percentage points.

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

The ranking sorted by CLS at p75, fastest first

# CDN CLS p75 Passing Sites
1 Fastly 0.01 88.0%
6,437
2 No CDN (origin) 0.01 89.5%
142,621
3 Akamai 0.02 88.1%
4,955
4 Cloudflare 0.02 88.6%
23,785
5 Vercel 0.05 83.7%
980
6 CloudFront 0.08 78.9%
6,141
7 Netlify 0.25 64.8%
343
The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · phone field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing CLS per CDN which group passes the CLS most often

CDNSitesPassing CLSp75
No CDN (origin) 75.1% 142,621 90% 0.01
Cloudflare 12.5% 23,785 89% 0.02
Akamai 2.6% 4,955 88% 0.02
Fastly 3.4% 6,437 88% 0.01
Vercel 0.5% 980 84% 0.05
CloudFront 3.2% 6,141 79% 0.08
Netlify 0.2% 343 65% 0.25
Good Needs Improvement Poor Sorted best-passing first · median colored by its own rating · pass = good CLS (0.1 at p75) · one value per site

90% of No CDN (origin) sites pass CLS. Netlify trails 25 points behind, leaving 35% of its sites failing. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · phone 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%
812.2s
92125ms
900.01
741.8s
561.2s
Cloudflare 12.5%
852.0s
91137ms
890.02
811.6s
69937ms
Fastly 3.4%
842.0s
91122ms
880.01
811.6s
73843ms
CloudFront 3.2%
792.3s
87154ms
790.08
751.8s
611.1s
Akamai 2.6%
812.2s
94129ms
880.02
771.7s
581.1s
Vercel 0.5%
792.4s
84169ms
840.05
761.8s
86599ms
Netlify 0.2%
742.6s
64354ms
650.25
731.9s
471.1s
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.

No CDN (origin) leads on CLS: 90% of its sites pass. Netlify trails at 65%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · Q2 2026 · 189,915 sites · phone 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, Fastly reaches a good CLS on 88.0% of sites; Netlify on 64.8%.

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