Skip to main contentHow fast does the banner appear?
419 ms
Median of 15 visits.
All 6 integrations, best first
- TanStack Start398 ms
- React419 ms
- Nuxt430 ms
- Next.js431 ms
- Astro434 ms
- Script tag442 ms
iubendaiubendaiubenda cookie banner: speed and features
In our tests with its React integration, iubenda showed its cookie banner in a median 419 ms on desktop. It added no measurable delay to the main content. Accept responded in 32 ms and Reject in 16 ms. It held trackers back in all 4 consent checks.
On an emulated mid-tier phone, the banner took 2.04 s. 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 React. We measured other CMPs on Next.js only, so this comparison uses iubenda’s other integrations.
Does it slow the page down?
No measurable delay95% interval −24 ms to 20 ms
Main content painted as fast as on the same page without a consent manager.
All 6 integrations, best first
- Next.js−4 ms
- Nuxt−4 ms
- React−4 ms
- Script tag0 ms
- Astro4 ms
- TanStack Start4 ms
How fast does a click respond?
32 msOne visit measured
Reject responded in 16 ms. Under 200 ms feels instant.
All 6 integrations, best first
- Next.js16 ms
- Nuxt24 ms
- Astro32 ms
- TanStack Start32 ms
- React32 ms
- Script tag40 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, desktop
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 | 442 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −16 ms to 12 ms | 40 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| ReactShown above | 419 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −24 ms to 20 ms | 32 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| Next.jsShared with every CMP | 431 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −16 ms to 12 ms | 16 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| Nuxt | 430 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −16 ms to 16 ms | 24 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| Astro | 434 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −8 ms to 28 ms | 32 msOne visit measured | 4 of 4 passed |
| TanStack Start | 398 ms | No measurable delay95% interval −20 ms to 20 ms | 32 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 419 ms. The published results do not show when iubenda started to load.
| Event | Time from navigation |
|---|---|
| First byte (TTFB) | 2 ms |
| First paint (FCP) | 76 ms |
| Largest paint (LCP) | 136 ms |
| Banner visible | 419 ms |
| 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 | 2 ms | No measurable difference95% interval 0 ms to 1 ms |
| FCPFirst Contentful Paint | 76 ms | No measurable difference95% interval −32 ms to 32 ms |
| LCPLargest Contentful Paint | 136 ms | No measurable difference95% interval −24 ms to 20 ms |
| CLSCumulative Layout Shift | 0.00 | No measurable difference95% interval: 0.00 |
| Primary content paintThe page’s main content, not the banner | 136 ms | No measurable difference95% interval −24 ms to 20 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 32 ms.
| Event | Time from the click |
|---|---|
| Screen responds | 32 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 | 673 KB | +121 KB95% interval: 121 KB |
| Deferred transferBytes loaded later | Not compared | |
| RequestsAll requests | 11 | +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 | 0 ms | 0 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.
