Comparison

Prerender vs. Alternatives

Find out how we back up against our competitors and alternative technology solutions. This comparison page will help you understand why our clients choose us to power over 600k domains.

Prerender vs. Botify

Botify’s strength lies in SEO reporting. It generates rendered content as a byproduct of its SEO auditing process. In contrast, Prerender is focused on pre-rendering JavaScript websites, resulting in faster rendering speeds and improved indexing accuracy.

Read comparison

Prerender vs. SEO4Ajax

Prerender’s dynamic rendering solution goes beyond SEO4Ajax by offering a configurable caching interval. This gives you control over how often search engines see your latest updates, making our tool the best rendering solution for enterprise websites.

Read comparison

Prerender vs. SSR vs. Static Rendering vs. Hydration

Prerender

It fetches all your page’s resources ahead of time and stores a cached version for search engines
Enterprise sites and SPAs
Plug-and-play
A couple of weeks
Near-zero development time and costs
Unlimited – plus, it can generate pre-rendered versions of dynamic URLs on the fly
Yes
Near-perfect scores

SSR

It renders your page every time a search bot or human user requests it
Sites with a Node.js backend
High technical knowledge required
6 months to a year
$120k+
Based on your server capabilities
No
Better LCP and CLS but low FID and server response scores

Static Rendering

It requires you to create an HTML version ahead of time for every page to be delivered to search engines on demand
Small SPAs and JS-based sites
High technical knowledge required
6 months on average
Based on the time needed to develop the static versions
Limited – Creating HTML versions for pages require they don’t change too often
No
High server response times and CWVs scores at a smaller scale

Hydration

It leaves the data-fetching logic and all non-interactive components to the server, but the client has to take care of the JS necessary to make the page interactive
Experimental Solution
High technical knowledge required
6 months to a year
$120k+
Based on your server capabilities, but it takes fewer resources than SSR
No
High server response time, LCP, and CLS, but low FID scores

Prerender

It fetches all your page’s resources ahead of time and stores a cached version for search engines
Enterprise sites and SPAs
Plug-and-play
A couple of weeks
Near-zero development time and costs
Unlimited – plus, it can generate pre-rendered versions of dynamic URLs on the fly
Yes
Near-perfect scores

SSR

It renders your page every time a search bot or human user requests it
Sites with a Node.js backend
High technical knowledge required
6 months to a year
$120k+
Based on your server capabilities
No
Better LCP and CLS but low FID and server response scores

Static Rendering

It requires you to create an HTML version ahead of time for every page to be delivered to search engines on demand
Small SPAs and JS-based sites
High technical knowledge required
6 months on avg
Based on the time needed to develop the static versions
Limited – Creating HTML versions for pages require they don’t change too often
No
High server response times and CWVs scores at a smaller scale

Hydration

It leaves the data-fetching logic and all non-interactive components to the server, but the client has to take care of the JS necessary to make the page interactive
Experimental Solution
High technical knowledge required
6 months to a year
$120k+
Based on your server capabilities, but it takes fewer resources than SSR
No
High server response time, LCP, and CLS, but low FID scores

Read our technology comparison for a detailed breakdown of the differences between each.

Try Prerender
Yourself—Free!

When you see the results in days, you’ll wish you tried Prerender sooner.

Prerender vs. Alternatives

Prerender vs. SSR vs. Static Rendering vs. Hydration

Prerender

SSR

Static Rendering

Hydration

Prerender

SSR

Static Rendering

Hydration

Try Prerender Yourself—Free!

Resources

Company

Try Prerender
Yourself—Free!