CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

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

At a glance the headline numbers for CDN performance

Performance breakdown by cdn.

89.9%
Best: Vercel
good TTFB
64.9%
Typical CDN
good TTFB
61.6%
Worst: No CDN (origin)
good TTFB

Vercel passes TTFB most often of any CDN. 89.9% of its sites pass. No CDN (origin) (the most-used CDN) passes least at 61.6%. The gap is 28 percentage points.

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

The ranking sorted by TTFB at p75, fastest first

# CDN TTFB p75 Passing Sites
1 Vercel 425ms 89.9%
1,171
2 Netlify 713ms 83.5%
410
3 Cloudflare 976ms 67.9%
26,787
4 Akamai 1.0s 64.9%
5,431
5 CloudFront 1.0s 64.8%
6,917
6 Fastly 1.1s 62.6%
6,980
7 No CDN (origin) 1.1s 61.6%
158,548
The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · desktop 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 90% 425ms
Netlify 0.2% 410 84% 713ms
Cloudflare 12.7% 26,787 68% 976ms
Akamai 2.6% 5,431 65% 1.0s
CloudFront 3.3% 6,917 65% 1.0s
Fastly 3.3% 6,980 63% 1.1s
No CDN (origin) 75.2% 158,548 62% 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

90% of Vercel sites pass TTFB. No CDN (origin) trails 28 points behind, leaving 38% of its sites failing. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · desktop 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%
862.0s
9963ms
780.09
821.6s
621.1s
Cloudflare 12.7%
881.9s
9971ms
800.08
851.4s
68976ms
Fastly 3.3%
871.9s
9865ms
780.09
861.4s
631.1s
CloudFront 3.3%
842.1s
9782ms
720.12
821.6s
651.0s
Akamai 2.6%
891.9s
9964ms
800.08
851.4s
651.0s
Vercel 0.6%
891.9s
9990ms
820.07
891.3s
90425ms
Netlify 0.2%
782.4s
91104ms
800.08
871.4s
84713ms
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: 90% of its sites pass. No CDN (origin) trails at 62%. computed

The State of Web Vitals · October 2026 · 210,902 crawled sites · desktop 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 89.9% of sites; No CDN (origin) on 61.6%.

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