Lighthouse vs Wappalyzer
Side-by-side comparison to help you choose.
| Feature | Lighthouse | Wappalyzer |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Extension | Extension |
| UnfragileRank | 40/100 | 38/100 |
| Adoption | 1 | 1 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 11 decomposed | 10 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Lighthouse measures page performance by instrumenting the browser's rendering pipeline to capture Core Web Vitals (Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, Cumulative Layout Shift), load time metrics, and resource waterfall analysis. It simulates network and CPU throttling profiles (4G, 3G, desktop) to generate reproducible performance scores on a 0-100 scale with diagnostic breakdowns for each metric.
Unique: Integrates directly into Chrome DevTools to instrument the browser's rendering pipeline and capture real-world Core Web Vitals metrics during page load, rather than using synthetic monitoring APIs or external services. Uses configurable throttling profiles to simulate network/CPU conditions reproducibly.
vs alternatives: Provides free, built-in performance auditing with Core Web Vitals directly in DevTools without requiring external services or API keys, unlike commercial APM tools like New Relic or DataDog.
Lighthouse performs automated accessibility auditing by analyzing the DOM tree, computing contrast ratios, validating semantic HTML structure, and checking for WCAG 2.1 violations. It generates an accessibility score (0-100) and lists specific issues (missing alt text, insufficient color contrast, improper heading hierarchy, missing ARIA labels) with severity levels and remediation guidance.
Unique: Analyzes the live DOM tree and computed styles in the browser context to detect accessibility issues, including contrast ratio calculations based on actual rendered colors, rather than static code analysis. Integrates with Chrome's accessibility tree to validate semantic structure.
vs alternatives: Free and built-in to DevTools, providing immediate accessibility feedback during development without requiring separate tools like axe DevTools or WAVE, though those tools provide more comprehensive manual testing capabilities.
Lighthouse performs deterministic, rule-based auditing using heuristics and predefined checks rather than machine learning models. Each audit rule is implemented as a specific test (e.g., 'check if HTTPS is enabled', 'measure Largest Contentful Paint', 'validate heading hierarchy') that produces consistent results across runs. This approach ensures transparency, reproducibility, and alignment with web standards.
Unique: Uses transparent, rule-based auditing aligned with official web standards (WCAG 2.1, Schema.org, HTTP standards) rather than machine learning models, ensuring reproducible results and clear explanations for each finding.
vs alternatives: Provides deterministic, standards-aligned auditing that is more transparent and reproducible than ML-based approaches, though it may miss nuanced issues that require human judgment or emerging best practices not yet codified in rules.
Lighthouse scans page metadata, structured data, mobile-friendliness, crawlability, and on-page SEO factors to generate an SEO score (0-100). It validates meta tags (title, description), checks for proper heading structure, verifies mobile viewport configuration, detects crawlability issues (robots.txt, canonical tags), and validates structured data (Schema.org markup) compliance.
Unique: Analyzes the live page DOM and HTTP headers to validate on-page SEO factors including meta tags, heading hierarchy, mobile viewport configuration, and Schema.org structured data, providing immediate feedback integrated into the DevTools workflow.
vs alternatives: Provides free, built-in SEO auditing without requiring external SEO tools or API keys, though it focuses on technical on-page factors rather than competitive analysis or ranking prediction like commercial SEO platforms.
Lighthouse audits pages for security headers (HTTPS, CSP, X-Frame-Options), detects outdated JavaScript libraries with known vulnerabilities, identifies console errors and warnings, and validates modern web standards compliance. It generates a Best Practices score (0-100) with specific recommendations for security hardening and code quality improvements.
Unique: Inspects HTTP response headers, analyzes loaded JavaScript resources against a vulnerability database, and captures console output during page load to identify security misconfigurations and code quality issues in a single integrated audit.
vs alternatives: Provides free security and code quality scanning integrated into DevTools, though it focuses on configuration and known vulnerabilities rather than dynamic security testing like commercial SAST/DAST tools.
Lighthouse validates Progressive Web App (PWA) compliance by checking for service worker registration, manifest.json presence and validity, offline capability, HTTPS requirement, and installability criteria. It generates a PWA score (0-100) and provides specific guidance on implementing missing PWA features like service workers, app manifests, and offline support.
Unique: Inspects the browser's service worker registration API, parses and validates the web app manifest.json, and checks HTTPS configuration to verify PWA compliance, providing immediate feedback on installability and offline capability requirements.
vs alternatives: Provides free PWA validation integrated into DevTools without external tools, though it focuses on static compliance checks rather than runtime testing of offline behavior or service worker caching strategies.
Lighthouse aggregates audit results across five categories (Performance, Accessibility, Best Practices, SEO, PWA) into individual 0-100 scores using weighted metrics and diagnostic data. Each category score is calculated from multiple underlying audits with configurable weighting, and results are displayed with visual indicators, opportunity prioritization, and diagnostic breakdowns to guide remediation efforts.
Unique: Aggregates results from dozens of individual audits across five categories into weighted 0-100 scores, with diagnostic data and opportunity prioritization to guide remediation. Scores are calculated using Google's proprietary weighting model based on real-world impact data.
vs alternatives: Provides a standardized, free scoring system that aligns with Google's web quality standards, making it easier to benchmark against industry expectations, though the fixed weighting may not match all team priorities.
For each detected issue, Lighthouse provides specific, actionable remediation guidance including code examples, links to documentation, and estimated impact (time savings, performance improvement, or compliance benefit). Issues are categorized by severity (error, warning, notice) and grouped by opportunity to help developers prioritize fixes based on effort and impact.
Unique: Provides context-aware remediation guidance for each detected issue, including code examples, severity levels, and estimated impact, integrated directly into the DevTools report. Recommendations are based on Google's web quality standards and best practices.
vs alternatives: Offers free, integrated remediation guidance without requiring external documentation lookup, though recommendations are generic and may require customization for specific use cases.
+3 more capabilities
Identifies 1,700+ technologies (frameworks, CMS platforms, analytics tools, programming languages) by pattern-matching against a curated signature database of HTTP headers, HTML meta tags, JavaScript variables, CSS classes, and DOM structure. The browser extension passively analyzes page source and HTTP responses without modifying the DOM or executing code, enabling real-time detection across visited websites without user interaction.
Unique: Uses a hand-curated signature database of 1,700+ technology fingerprints (HTTP headers, meta tags, JavaScript globals, CSS patterns) rather than ML-based inference, enabling deterministic detection without cloud API calls or model inference latency. The browser extension operates entirely client-side with no data transmission during detection.
vs alternatives: Faster and more privacy-preserving than cloud-based AI detection tools because all pattern matching occurs locally in the browser extension without sending page content to external servers.
Programmatic API endpoint that accepts domain names or URLs and returns detected technology stacks in JSON format. Queries the same signature database as the browser extension but operates server-side, enabling batch processing of thousands of domains without browser overhead. API access is metered via credit system (5,000-200,000+ credits/month depending on plan tier) with 60-365 day credit expiration windows.
Unique: Implements a credit-based consumption model (5,000-200,000 credits/month) with explicit expiration windows (60 or 365 days) rather than unlimited API calls, forcing users to plan batch processing windows and creating predictable revenue for the platform. Credits remain usable during plan pauses (up to 3 months) but are forfeited on cancellation.
vs alternatives: More cost-predictable than per-request pricing models because bulk credits are purchased upfront, but less flexible than unlimited APIs for unpredictable workloads due to credit expiration deadlines.
Lighthouse scores higher at 40/100 vs Wappalyzer at 38/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Monitors a list of tracked websites for technology stack changes (new tools added, versions updated, technologies removed) and sends alerts when changes are detected. The free tier supports 5 website alerts; paid tiers expand capacity. Detection runs on a schedule (frequency unknown) comparing current technology signatures against historical snapshots stored in Wappalyzer's backend.
Unique: Implements a tiered alert system (5 alerts free, higher limits on paid plans) with backend snapshot comparison rather than real-time webhooks, enabling cost-effective monitoring without requiring persistent connections. Alert granularity and filtering options are unknown.
vs alternatives: Simpler to set up than custom monitoring scripts because alerts are pre-configured and managed by Wappalyzer, but less flexible than self-hosted solutions for custom change detection logic or filtering.
Augments technology detection results with third-party B2B data including company name, industry classification, employee count, location, revenue estimates, and contact information (email, phone, LinkedIn profiles). Data sources and verification methods are not documented. Available through browser extension, web app, and API with plan-dependent access (Plus features mentioned but not detailed).
Unique: Combines deterministic technology detection with third-party B2B data enrichment in a single query, eliminating the need for separate API calls to contact databases. Data sources and verification methods are proprietary and undocumented, creating a black-box enrichment layer.
vs alternatives: More convenient than chaining separate technology detection and B2B data APIs because results are unified in a single response, but less transparent than dedicated B2B data providers regarding data source quality and freshness.
Integrations with CRM platforms (specific platforms not documented) that automatically enrich contact and company records with detected technologies and B2B data. Integration mechanism (webhooks, API polling, native connectors) not documented. Enables sales teams to populate technology stack information directly into CRM workflows without manual lookups.
Unique: Provides native CRM integrations that eliminate manual API calls for enrichment, but specific supported platforms, sync mechanisms, and field mapping options are undocumented, making it difficult to assess integration depth and flexibility.
vs alternatives: More seamless than manual API integration because enrichment happens automatically within CRM workflows, but less flexible than custom API implementations for non-standard CRM platforms or complex enrichment logic.
Mobile application for Android devices that enables technology detection on websites visited through the Android browser or in-app web views. Functionality mirrors the browser extension (signature-based detection) but operates within the Android sandbox. Specific features, detection latency, and data sync mechanisms are not documented.
Unique: Extends signature-based detection to mobile devices within Android sandbox constraints, but specific implementation details (detection latency, data sync, offline capability) are undocumented, making it unclear how feature parity with desktop extension is maintained.
vs alternatives: More convenient than desktop-only detection for mobile-first workflows, but likely less feature-complete than desktop extension due to Android sandbox limitations and undocumented feature gaps.
Web-based interface at wappalyzer.com that enables users to manually enter domain names or URLs and receive technology detection results with optional B2B enrichment data. Results can be viewed in the browser, exported, or saved for later reference. Dashboard provides historical lookup data and reporting features (specifics unknown). Accessible to all plan tiers with varying feature availability.
Unique: Provides a zero-installation alternative to browser extension for technology detection, but lacks bulk processing and advanced reporting features, positioning it as a convenience tool rather than a primary workflow interface.
vs alternatives: More accessible than extension-only tools for users in restricted environments, but less efficient than API or extension for repeated lookups due to manual input and lack of automation.
Curated database of 1,700+ technology signatures (patterns for frameworks, CMS, analytics tools, programming languages) maintained by Wappalyzer team. Signatures include HTTP header patterns, HTML meta tag patterns, JavaScript variable names, CSS class patterns, and DOM structure indicators. Database is updated to reflect new technology releases and deprecated tools, but update frequency and methodology are not documented. All detection capabilities (extension, API, mobile, dashboard) query this same signature database.
Unique: Maintains a hand-curated signature database rather than relying on ML-based pattern discovery, enabling deterministic detection but creating a maintenance burden that scales with technology ecosystem growth. Update frequency and community contribution mechanisms are undocumented.
vs alternatives: More reliable than ML-based detection for known technologies because signatures are explicitly defined, but less scalable than automated pattern discovery for emerging or niche technologies due to manual curation requirements.
+2 more capabilities