Skip to main contentHow fast does the banner appear?
2.39 s
Median of 15 visits.
All 6 integrations, best first
- React2.04 s
- Script tag2.24 s
- Astro2.31 s
- Nuxt2.39 s
- TanStack Start2.61 s
- Next.js2.66 s
iubendaiubendaiubenda cookie banner: speed and features
In our tests with its Nuxt integration, iubenda showed its cookie banner in a median 2.39 s on an emulated mid-tier phone. It delayed the main content by 616 ms (95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms). Accept responded in 24 ms and Reject in 40 ms. It held trackers back in all 4 consent checks.
On desktop, the banner took 430 ms. Per vendor docs, iubenda supports IAB TCF, IAB GPP, Google Consent Mode v2, Google CMP certification and Global Privacy Control.
How fast is iubenda’s cookie banner?
On Nuxt. We measured other CMPs on Next.js only, so this comparison uses iubenda’s other integrations.
Does it slow the page down?
+616 ms95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms
Compared with the same page without a consent manager.
All 6 integrations, best first
- React404 ms
- Next.js612 ms
- Script tag612 ms
- Nuxt616 ms
- Astro616 ms
- TanStack Start616 ms
How fast does a click respond?
24 msOne visit measured
Reject responded in 40 ms. Under 200 ms feels instant.
All 6 integrations, best first
- React16 ms
- Nuxt24 ms
- Astro24 ms
- TanStack Start24 ms
- Next.js32 ms
- Script tag32 ms
Does it block trackers until consent?
4 of 4consent checks passed
No tracker ran and the page set no cookie before the visitor chose.
All 6 integrations, best first
- Next.js100%
- Nuxt100%
- Astro100%
- TanStack Start100%
- React100%
- Script tag100%
Which standards and features does iubenda support?
Each status comes from iubenda’s documentation. CookieBench does not test these features unless a line says so.
- Verified by test
- Per vendor docs
- Partial
- Not supported
- Unknown
| Feature | Status |
|---|---|
| IAB TCF | TCF v2.2 (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| IAB GPP | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Google Consent Mode v2 | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Google-certified CMP | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Global Privacy Control | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Feature | Status |
|---|---|
| Geo-targeted banners | Advanced and Ultimate plans (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Script blocking | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Consent records | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Cookie scanning | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Feature | Status |
|---|---|
| Open source | Hosted embed only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Self-hostable | Hosted embed only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Headless UI | Experimental (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| TypeScript types | Unknown |
| Feature | Status |
|---|---|
| Free tier | Under 5,000 pageviews a month (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
Which frameworks does iubenda support?
- First-party SDKs
- None
- Script tag
- Supported
- Measured in this run
- Script tag, React, Next.js, Nuxt, Astro and TanStack Start
Support per iubenda’s documentation (opens in a new tab).
iubenda’s results by framework, mobile (emulated)
Each row is a separate app. We measured each one against the same app without a consent manager. The rows compare integrations, not frameworks.
| Framework | Banner appears | Page slowed by | Click responds in | Trackers blocked |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Script tag | 2.24 s | +612 ms95% interval 600 ms to 620 ms | 32 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| React | 2.04 s | +404 ms95% interval 388 ms to 424 ms | 16 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| Next.jsShared with every CMP | 2.66 s | +612 ms95% interval 600 ms to 624 ms | 32 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| NuxtShown above | 2.39 s | +616 ms95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms | 24 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| Astro | 2.31 s | +616 ms95% interval 608 ms to 620 ms | 24 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| TanStack Start | 2.61 s | +616 ms95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms | 24 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
When does iubenda load, and what does it cost the page?
Lab detail for engineers. All Core Web Vitals are here. The summary leaves some of them out.
When does iubenda start loading?
The banner was visible at 2.39 s. The published results do not show when iubenda started to load.
| Event | Time from navigation |
|---|---|
| First byte (TTFB) | 5 ms |
| First paint (FCP) | 236 ms |
| Banner visible | 2.39 s |
| Largest paint (LCP) | 3.77 s |
| CMP requested | |
| CMP loaded | |
| Consent state known |
How do page vitals compare with no consent manager?
Each row shows the value on the page with the consent manager. It also shows how far the value moved from the same page without one.
| Measure | With iubenda | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| TTFBTime to first byte | 5 ms | No measurable difference95% interval −2 ms to 2 ms |
| FCPFirst Contentful Paint | 236 ms | No measurable difference95% interval 0 ms to 20 ms |
| LCPLargest Contentful Paint | 3.77 s | +616 ms95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms |
| CLSCumulative Layout Shift | 0.00 | No measurable difference95% interval: 0.00 |
| Primary content paintThe page’s main content, not the banner | 3.77 s | +616 ms95% interval 604 ms to 624 ms |
What was the largest element on screen?
LCP times the largest element on screen. If that is the banner, LCP measures the banner instead of the page.
There is no LCP attribution for this profile and framework.
What happens after a visitor clicks Accept?
The screen responded to Accept in 24 ms.
| Event | Time from the click |
|---|---|
| Screen responds | 24 ms |
| Banner gone | |
| Consent applied | |
| Analytics active |
How much does it download?
Initial transfer happens before the page settles. Deferred transfer comes after.
| Measure | With iubenda | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| Initial transferBytes before the page settles | 675 KB | +122 KB95% interval: 122 KB |
| Deferred transferBytes loaded later | Not compared | |
| RequestsAll requests | 13 | +4No interval reported |
| Third-party requestsRequests to other hosts | 4 | +4No interval reported |
Does it block the main thread?
Long tasks are stretches over 50 ms when the page cannot respond to taps or keys.
| Measure | With iubenda | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| Long-task timeBlocking time during load | 48 ms | +48 msNo interval reported |
What do returning visitors see?
A visitor who accepted on an earlier visit comes back. We check that the banner stays hidden.
- Banner stayed hidden
- Consent state known at
What was tested?
- Methodology
- cookiebench-v3.2.4
- Analysis
matrix-2026-10-11- Issues
- None recorded in this run
On desktop, it appeared in a median 431 ms, against 471 ms for the median of the 10 CMPs measured. On an emulated mid-tier phone, it appeared in a median 2.66 s, against 2.71 s for the median of the 10 CMPs measured.
On desktop it added no measurable delay to the main content. On an emulated mid-tier phone it delayed the main content by 612 ms (95% interval 600 ms to 624 ms). Delay is the extra time before the main content appears. We compare Largest Contentful Paint on the same page, with and without a consent manager.
It passed 4 of 4 checks on desktop and on an emulated mid-tier phone. A check fails if a tracker runs, the page sets a cookie or data leaves the page before the visitor chooses.
Per vendor docs, iubenda supports IAB TCF, IAB GPP, Google Consent Mode v2, Google CMP certification and Global Privacy Control. Feature support comes from iubenda’s documentation. CookieBench did not test these features itself.
