CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites October 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.

87.1%
Best: Vercel
good TTFB
56.2%
Most used: No CDN (origin)
good TTFB
46.7%
Worst: Netlify
good TTFB

Vercel passes TTFB most often of any CDN. 87.1% of its sites pass. Netlify passes least at 46.7%. No CDN (origin) (the most-used CDN) sits at 56.2%. The gap is 40 percentage points.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · phone field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
2

The ranking sorted by TTFB at p75, fastest first

# CDN TTFB p75 Passing Sites
1 Vercel 595ms 87.1%
1,171
2 Fastly 860ms 72.7%
6,980
3 Cloudflare 936ms 69.4%
26,787
4 Netlify 1.1s 46.7%
410
5 CloudFront 1.1s 61.3%
6,917
6 Akamai 1.1s 57.7%
5,431
7 No CDN (origin) 1.2s 56.2%
158,548
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · phone field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing TTFB per CDN which group passes the TTFB most often

CDNSitesPassing TTFBp75
Vercel 0.6% 1,171 87% 595ms
Fastly 3.3% 6,980 73% 860ms
Cloudflare 12.7% 26,787 69% 936ms
CloudFront 3.3% 6,917 61% 1.1s
Akamai 2.6% 5,431 58% 1.1s
No CDN (origin) 75.2% 158,548 56% 1.2s
Netlify 0.2% 410 47% 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

87% of Vercel sites pass TTFB. Netlify trails 40 points behind, leaving 53% of its sites failing. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled 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) 75.2%
812.2s
92125ms
900.01
741.8s
561.2s
Cloudflare 12.7%
862.0s
91137ms
890.02
811.6s
69936ms
Fastly 3.3%
842.1s
91124ms
880.01
801.6s
73860ms
CloudFront 3.3%
802.3s
88154ms
790.08
751.8s
611.1s
Akamai 2.6%
812.2s
94129ms
880.02
771.8s
581.1s
Vercel 0.6%
802.3s
85168ms
840.05
761.8s
87595ms
Netlify 0.2%
732.6s
64336ms
660.23
711.9s
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.

Vercel leads on TTFB: 87% of its sites pass. Netlify trails at 47%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled 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, Vercel reaches a good TTFB on 87.1% of sites; No CDN (origin) on 56.2%.

Related signals CMS (12) → Frameworks (11) → 210,902 crawled sites with Chrome field data, representing millions of real page loads · How we measured