LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket – Which is better in Performance?
LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket comparison done on two sites. The main metrics we want to compare were speed and core web vitals. The LS Cache plugin needs a LiteSpeed server to operate, but can use QUIC.cloud. WP Rocket plugin works on any server.
DreamHost Shared Hosting used on both sites.
ThinkMinds
- Using QUIC.cloud CDN
- 14 Active plugins
- Using AMP on mobile pages.
- Optimal LiteSpeed Cache plugin settings.
- Using Standard Plan of QUIC.cloud
- CDN, Image Optimization, Page Optimization, LQIP enabled in QUIC.cloud settings.
- Using Rank Math Pro plugin.
WPReviewTips
- Using Cloudflare CDN – Free version
- 19 Active plugins
- Using AMP plugin for mobile.
- No Rocket CDN (aff) used.
- Optimal WP Rocket settings
- Bot Fight Mode, Brotli compression, Rocket Loader, Argo Tiered Cache enabled in Cloudflare.
- Using Yoast SEO plugin
GTMetrix - Desktop
| LIteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| GTMetrix Grade | A | A |
| Performance | 100% | 86% |
| Structure | 100% | 100% |
| LCP | 282ms | 849ms |
| TBT | 0ms | 302ms |
| CLS | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| TTFB | 92ms | 417ms |
| Onload Time | 243ms | 898ms |
| Time to Interactive | 283ms | 1.8s |
| Fully Loaded Time | 362ms | 1.9s |
| Top Issues | All Low | All Low |
| Total Page Size | 43.8KB | 286KB |
| Total Page Requests | 6 | 33 |
| Connection Duration | 2ms | 62ms |
| DOM Interactive Time | 228ms | 533ms |
| First Paint | 283ms | 736ms |
The main advantage with LiteSpeed cache – TTFB reduced a lot. In addition, core-webvitals like LCP, FCP, FID, CLS are scoring well. The fully loaded time also reduced by 425%.
Winner – LiteSpeed Cache*
* Note – Since the comparison of LiteSpeed Cache and WP Rocket done on two different sites, there will be slight variation in the resources and plugins. This could also have an impact on the speed and performance.
GTMetrix - Mobile (AMP)
| LIteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| GTMetrix Grade | A | A |
| Performance | 100% | 97% |
| Structure | 100% | 99% |
| LCP | 532ms | 1.0s |
| TBT | 3ms | 0ms |
| CLS | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| TTFB | 98ms | 409ms |
| Onload Time | 669ms | 1.2s |
| Time to Interactive | 618ms | 1.0s |
| Fully Loaded Time | 973ms | 1.2s |
| Top Issues | All Low | All Low |
| Total Page Size | 387KB | 593KB |
| Total Page Requests | 24 | 32 |
| Connection Duration | 87ms | 71ms |
| DOM Interactive Time | 261ms | 925ms |
| First Paint | 532ms | 1.0s |
In the AMP test results, WP Rocket fared well compared to desktop. But it is not an accurate measure, as caching doesn’t have much effect on AMP. But I would like to test the performance of AMP pages using page speed test tools. The results are great.
Here also, TTFB 318% faster in LiteSpeed Cache compared to WP Rocket. It is primarily because of QUIC.cloud CDN. The fully loaded time is 24% faster than WP Rocket. Compared to the desktop pages, WP Rocket has improved in the AMP test results.
Winner ; LiteSpeed Cache*
Google PageSpeed Insights - Desktop
| LIteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 100 | 99 |
| FCP | 0.3s | 0.8s |
| Speed Index | 0.6s | 0.9s |
| LCP | 0.3s | 0.8s |
| Time to Interactive | 0.3s | 0.9s |
| Total Blocking Time | 0ms | 20ms |
| CLS | 0.0 | 0.004 |
In the desktop results also, core web vitals performed well on the LiteSpeed cache. The LCP and FCP values were 0.5s better than WP Rocket. Though there is not much difference in performance, the number of improvements required were more in WP Rocket.
Winner – LiteSpeed Cache*
Google PageSpeed Insights - Mobile (AMP)
| LIteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket | |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 100 | 63 |
| FCP | 1.0s | 3.8s |
| Speed Index | 1.4s | 3.8s |
| LCP | 1.0s | 7.7s |
| Time to Interactive | 1.0s | 6.1s |
| Total Blocking Time | 0ms | 100ms |
| CLS | 0.0 | 0.045 |
The LCP value 670% better in LiteSpeed Cache compared to WP Rocket. Similarly there is a difference of 2.8s in the FCP results.
Winner – LiteSpeed Cache*
LiteSpeed Cache vs WP Rocket - Feature Comparison
| Feature | LiteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket* |
|---|---|---|
| Full-Page Cache | ✅** | ✅ |
| Tag-Based “Smart Purge” | ✅** | ❌ |
| Tight Integration With Server | ✅** | ❌ |
| Edge Side Includes (ESI) | ✅** | ❌ |
| Crawler | ✅** | ✅ (Cache Preloading) |
| WordPress Multi-Site Support | ✅** | ✅ |
| Cache Logged-in Users | ✅** | ✅ (User Cache) |
| Cache Separate Mobile View | ✅** | ✅ |
| Cache Vary on User Group | ✅** | ❌ |
| Cache Vary on Geographic Location, Currency, etc | ✅** | ✅ |
| Cache REST API | ✅** | ✅ |
| Purge Selected URLs on a Schedule | ✅** | ❌ |
| Browser Cache Support | ✅** | ✅ |
*WP Rocket feature list based on what listed publicly on the WP Rocket website
**Feature requires a licensed copy of LiteSpeed Web Server with Cache Module
Services - LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket
| Service | LiteSpeed Cache | WP Rocket* |
|---|---|---|
| Critical CSS Generation | ✅ | ✅ |
| Image Optimization | ✅ | ❌ |
| Responsive Lazy Load Placeholder Generation | ✅ | ❌ |
Source: https://blog.litespeedtech.com/
Pricing – LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket
WP Rocket – Paid
There are different plans. You get discounts during Black Friday, Christmas and other seasonal festivals. Single license is $49/year, Plus is $99/year and Infinite is $249/year. Each has their own features. It works on most of the hosting services and servers like Apache, NGINX.
LiteSpeed Cache – Free
This plugin is free by itself. But to use page caching you need a LiteSpeed Server. The reason being caching mechanism done by the cache engine on the server. Some hosting services provide this type of server.
If you don’t have it then you can use the Free QUIC.cloud CDN, which provides a LiteSpeed server. The cache usage is based on a pro-rata basis. For small sites a starting price of $5 is sufficient.
Ecommerce – LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket
The LiteSpeed cache solution allows a cache of dynamic pages using its server engine technology. You need to enable the ESI (Edge Side Includes) module to make this happen. Product pages and blocks of code can be cached using this method. Holes are punched in the public pages and shopping cart data is served using dynamic cache. Without lose of any security.
WP Rocket supports caching of shopping pages using WooCommerce technology. But dynamic caching of carts, check-out pages, and private pages is not possible.
Winner – LiteSpeed Cache
Installation
The LiteSpeed Cache plugin has 2+ million installations, according to the WordPress plugin repository. It is by far one of the most used cache plugins. But the configuration is a little difficult and needs some technical expertise. But QUIC.cloud settings are far easier. You benefit for the hard-work done.
Another important LiteSpeed Cache vs. WP Rocket comparison feature is the number of users.
WP Rocket settings are far easier to configure than LiteSpeed Cache. But for advanced settings like critical CSS generation, font cache you need to be a better user of WordPress. It works on all types of servers, which is another pro of WP Rocket. The number of WP Rocket installations is also around 2+ million.
Winner – Stalemate
Recommendation
I recommend to install LiteSpeed Cache plugin with QUIC.cloud. Though WP Rocket is more popular and easy to configure, it doesn’t fit all needs. You need extra plugins to do page caching, CSS and JS compatibility.
On the other side, if you can learn a few settings of LiteSpeed Cache and install it, it does wonders. The GTMetrix and PageSpeed Insights results show that LiteSpeed Cache scores a complete 100.
But if you have display and video ads, the game is altogether different. Then you need to do further benchmark tests.
Disclaimer: Some affiliate urls are used to link to relevant WordPress products. When you purchase through these links, I receive a small commission. No Fee, No extra Payment.
