The State of Web Vitals

Web font formats and the Core Web Vitals

92.8% of font-using sites (172,107) serve modern WOFF2 fonts and reach 86% good LCP (1.4s median), while the 28.8% still serving legacy WOFF (82% good LCP) and 17.4% serving uncompressed TTF (83% good LCP) lag behind.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites October 2026 edition · Desktop field outcomes

92.8% of sites use WOFF2 fonts web font format, and 86% of those sites have a good LCP, against 86% of all sites.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 212,308 crawled sites · 70,213 with desktop field data · 185,441 sites with web font formatBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
1

LCP pass rate

Sites with WOFF2 fonts web font format have a good LCP most often: 86%, against 86% of all sites. Sites with legacy WOFF fonts font formats have it least often, at 82%.

SitesGood, needs improvement, poor LCPMedian
All sites70,21386%1.4s
WOFF2 (Brotli-compressed) 92.8%58,07586%1.4s
OpenType (OTF) 2.0%1,61584%1.5s
TrueType (TTF) 17.4%10,81583%1.5s
Other font formats 1.2%86083%1.5s
WOFF (Legacy zlib) 28.8%17,26082%1.5s
GoodNeeds improvementPoorSites: with Chrome field data
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 212,308 crawled sites · 70,213 with desktop field data · 185,441 sites with web font formatBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

Web font format usage

WOFF2 fonts is the most used: 92.8% of sites.

Sites using each option (sites can use more than one) 185,441 sites
WOFF2 (Brotli-compressed) 92.8% WOFF (Legacy zlib) 28.8% TrueType (TTF) 17.4%
WOFF2 (Brotli-compressed) 92.8% WOFF (Legacy zlib) 28.8% TrueType (TTF) 17.4% OpenType (OTF) 2.0% Other font formats 1.2%
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 212,308 crawled sites · 70,213 with desktop field data · 185,441 sites with web font formatBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

LCP phase breakdown by web font format

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between WOFF2 fonts and legacy WOFF fonts sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 588 ms median for WOFF2 fonts against 652 ms for legacy WOFF fonts. Overall median field LCP is 1.4s for WOFF2 fonts (TTFB 588 ms, load delay 285 ms, load duration 113 ms, render delay 197 ms) versus 1.5s for legacy WOFF fonts.

Median LCP phase breakdown (Chrome field p75) Load delay Median LCP
Sites with web font format 46,568582 ms281 ms195 ms281 mslab 324 ms1.4s
TrueType (TTF) 8,073630 ms282 ms193 ms282 mslab 328 ms1.5s
WOFF2 (Brotli-compressed) 42,992588 ms285 ms197 ms285 mslab 328 ms1.4s
WOFF (Legacy zlib) 12,875652 ms296 ms205 ms296 mslab 342 ms1.5s
OpenType (OTF) 1,196527 ms329 ms204 ms329 mslab 380 ms1.5s
Other font formats 649564 ms332 ms216 ms332 mslab 355 ms1.5s
TTFB Resource load delay Resource load time Element render delay
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 212,308 crawled sites · 70,213 with desktop field data · 185,441 sites with web font formatBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
4

Understanding web font formats

Why WOFF2 replaces legacy WOFF, TTF, and OTF across all modern browsers

WOFF2 uses custom Brotli preprocessing to compress font glyphs ~30% smaller than legacy WOFF and up to 50%+ smaller than raw TTF or OTF files, and has been supported by every major browser since 2016. Across 172,107 font-using sites (92.8%) serving WOFF2, good LCP reaches 86% (1.4s median). Sites still serving legacy WOFF (28.8%, 53,419) drop to 82% good LCP (1.5s median), and sites serving raw TTF (17.4%, 32,192) drop to 83% good LCP (1.5s median).

Declare only format("woff2") in your @font-face src rules and ensure WOFF2 is listed first if legacy fallbacks exist, so modern browsers never download uncompressed TTF or WOFF files. Across all font-using sites, 92.8% serve WOFF2 (86% good LCP) versus 17.4% serving raw TTF (83% good LCP).

Go fix it Self-host Google Fonts → Responsive font loading strategy →
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 212,308 crawled sites · 70,213 with desktop field data · 185,441 sites with web font formatBy Arjen Karel · corewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
Platform & Framework Takeaways

How web font format plays out per platform

What the field data shows when you isolate a single CMS or framework.

WordPress 64,064 sites
75% vs 72% good LCP (WOFF2 vs uncompressed TTF)

36.5% of WordPress sites download WOFF and 18.3% download TTF (72% good LCP vs 75% for WOFF2).

Across 64,064 font-using WordPress sites, 94.7% serve WOFF2 (75% good LCP), 36.5% download WOFF (71% good LCP), and 18.3% download TrueType TTF files (72% good LCP, 1.9s median).

Read the WordPress font format breakdown →
Shopify 8,451 stores
96% vs 91% good LCP (WOFF2 vs raw TTF on Shopify)

99.4% of Shopify stores serve WOFF2 fonts (96% good LCP), while 3.0% load TTF (91%).

Shopify's Liquid font_face filter emits .woff2 and .woff font URLs. Across Shopify storefronts, 99.4% serve WOFF2 (96% good LCP, 1.3s median), 20.9% load WOFF (96% good LCP), and 3.0% load TTF (91% good LCP, 1.5s median).

Read the Shopify font format breakdown →
React & Next.js 9,518 sites
80% vs 61% good LCP (WOFF2 vs raw TTF on React)

React & Next.js sites loading TTF fonts (7.3%) pass LCP 19 points less often than sites on WOFF2 (61% vs 80%).

Across 9,518 font-using React sites, 96.8% serve WOFF2 (80% good LCP, 1.5s median), 14.1% serve WOFF (69% good LCP), and 7.3% serve TTF (61% good LCP, 2.1s median).

Related signals Uses @import → font-display strategy → Images per page → Cookies per site → By Arjen Karel · 212,308 crawled sites (70,213 with desktop Chrome field data, 185,441 sites with web font format, October 2026) · How we measured