CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

Field data PhoneDesktopAll Scope All sites October 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.

89.3%
Best: Vercel
good TTFB
55.9%
Most used: No CDN (origin)
good TTFB
47.8%
Worst: Netlify
good TTFB

Vercel passes TTFB most often of any CDN. 89.3% of its sites pass. Netlify passes least at 47.8%. No CDN (origin) (the most-used CDN) sits at 55.9%. The gap is 42 percentage points.

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled 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 551ms 89.3%
1,171
2 Fastly 873ms 72.3%
6,980
3 Cloudflare 947ms 69.1%
26,787
4 Netlify 1.1s 47.8%
410
5 CloudFront 1.1s 62.6%
6,917
6 Akamai 1.1s 59.3%
5,431
7 No CDN (origin) 1.3s 55.9%
158,548
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · all devices field datacorewebvitals.io/state-of-cwv
3

Passing TTFB per CDN which group passes the TTFB most often

CDNSitesPassing TTFBp75
Vercel 0.6% 1,171 89% 551ms
Fastly 3.3% 6,980 72% 873ms
Cloudflare 12.7% 26,787 69% 947ms
CloudFront 3.3% 6,917 63% 1.1s
Akamai 2.6% 5,431 59% 1.1s
No CDN (origin) 75.2% 158,548 56% 1.3s
Netlify 0.2% 410 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

89% of Vercel sites pass TTFB. Netlify trails 41 points behind, leaving 52% of its sites failing. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled 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) 75.2%
822.2s
95106ms
880.03
751.8s
561.3s
Cloudflare 12.7%
862.0s
94116ms
880.04
821.6s
69947ms
Fastly 3.3%
862.0s
94104ms
880.02
831.5s
72873ms
CloudFront 3.3%
812.2s
92136ms
780.09
781.7s
631.1s
Akamai 2.6%
832.1s
97110ms
860.04
791.7s
591.1s
Vercel 0.6%
822.2s
91149ms
850.05
791.7s
89551ms
Netlify 0.2%
772.5s
74219ms
700.15
751.8s
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: 89% of its sites pass. Netlify trails at 48%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled 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 89.3% of sites; No CDN (origin) on 55.9%.

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