JavaScript frameworks on WordPress sites and the Core Web Vitals

Sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks pass all three Core Web Vitals most often: 69%, against 60% of all WordPress sites. The biggest gap is LCP, 82% against 76%.

Sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks have a good LCP most often: 82%, against 76% of all WordPress sites. Sites with React frameworks have it least often, at 66%.

Sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks have a good INP most often: 100%, against 100% of all WordPress sites. Sites with Alpine.js frameworks have it least often, at 99%.

Sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks have a good CLS most often: 81%, against 78% of all WordPress sites. Sites with Vue.js frameworks have it least often, at 75%.

JQuery is the most used: 99.5% of WordPress sites. Alpine.js is 0.6% of WordPress sites.

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between Alpine.js and React sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 901 ms median for Alpine.js against 1203 ms for React. Overall median field LCP is 1.5s for Alpine.js (TTFB 901 ms, load delay 217 ms, load duration 125 ms, render delay 223 ms) versus 2.0s for React.

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between Alpine.js and React sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 901 ms median for Alpine.js against 1203 ms for React. Overall median field LCP is 1.5s for Alpine.js (TTFB 901 ms, load delay 217 ms, load duration 125 ms, render delay 223 ms) versus 2.0s for React.

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between Alpine.js and React sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 901 ms median for Alpine.js against 1203 ms for React. Overall median field LCP is 1.5s for Alpine.js (TTFB 901 ms, load delay 217 ms, load duration 125 ms, render delay 223 ms) versus 2.0s for React.

Across the four LCP sub-parts in Chrome's field data, the largest gap between Alpine.js and React sits in time to first byte (TTFB): 901 ms median for Alpine.js against 1203 ms for React. Overall median field LCP is 1.5s for Alpine.js (TTFB 901 ms, load delay 217 ms, load duration 125 ms, render delay 223 ms) versus 2.0s for React.

Alpine sets the JavaScript frameworks to Alpine.js on 100% of its sites, and 69% of Alpine sites pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 60% of all sites. jQuery sets the JavaScript frameworks to jQuery on 100% of its sites, and 60% of jQuery sites pass all three.

Alpine sets the JavaScript frameworks to Alpine.js on 100% of its sites, and 82% of Alpine sites have a good LCP, against 76% of all sites. jQuery sets the JavaScript frameworks to jQuery on 100% of its sites, and 75% of jQuery sites have a good LCP.

Alpine sets the JavaScript frameworks to Alpine.js on 100% of its sites, and 99% of Alpine sites have a good INP, against 100% of all sites. jQuery sets the JavaScript frameworks to jQuery on 100% of its sites, and 100% of jQuery sites have a good INP.

Alpine sets the JavaScript frameworks to Alpine.js on 100% of its sites, and 81% of Alpine sites have a good CLS, against 78% of all sites. jQuery sets the JavaScript frameworks to jQuery on 100% of its sites, and 77% of jQuery sites have a good CLS.

FrameworkJavaScript frameworks on its sitesPass all three

WordPress sites with JavaScript frameworks 60,616 sitesjQuery 100%60%

Alpine 380 sitesAlpine.js 100%jQuery 85%69%

jQuery 60,314 sitesjQuery 100%60%

Vue 4,844 sitesVue.js 100%jQuery 97%57%

React 2,233 sitesReact 100%jQuery 95%50%

jQuery Vue.js React Alpine.js Angular Svelte htmx

Does the framework explain the JavaScript frameworks difference?

Almost every site with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks is a Alpine site, and almost every Alpine site has Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks, so the data can't tell Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks and Alpine apart. On jQuery, 66% of sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 60% of jQuery sites with jQuery. Within jQuery, sites with Alpine.js and jQuery pass all three about equally often. On Vue, 57% of sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks pass all three Core Web Vitals, against 57% of Vue sites with Vue.js. Within Vue, sites with jQuery and Vue.js pass all three about equally often.

Almost every site with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks is a Alpine site, and almost every Alpine site has Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks, so the data can't tell Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks and Alpine apart. On jQuery, 80% of sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks have a good LCP, against 75% of jQuery sites with jQuery. Within jQuery, sites with Alpine.js and jQuery have a good LCP about equally often. On Vue, 74% of sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks have a good LCP, against 75% of Vue sites with Vue.js. Within Vue, sites with jQuery and Vue.js have a good LCP about equally often.

Almost every site with jQuery JavaScript frameworks is a jQuery site, and almost every jQuery site has jQuery JavaScript frameworks, so the data can't tell jQuery JavaScript frameworks and jQuery apart. On Vue, 100% of sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks have a good INP, against 99% of Vue sites with Vue.js. Within Vue, sites with jQuery and Vue.js have a good INP about equally often. On React, 100% of sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks have a good INP, against 99% of React sites with Vue.js. Within React, sites with jQuery and Vue.js have a good INP about equally often.

Almost every site with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks is a Alpine site, and almost every Alpine site has Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks, so the data can't tell Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks and Alpine apart. On jQuery, 80% of sites with Alpine.js JavaScript frameworks have a good CLS, against 77% of jQuery sites with jQuery. Within jQuery, sites with Alpine.js and jQuery have a good CLS about equally often. On Vue, 74% of sites with jQuery JavaScript frameworks have a good CLS, against 75% of Vue sites with Vue.js. Within Vue, sites with jQuery and Vue.js have a good CLS about equally often.