Didomi vs CookieYes: cookie banner speed and features compared
On emulated mobile, CookieYes showed its banner sooner, in a median 2.42 s against 4.41 s for Didomi. CookieYes delayed the main content 1.10 s less. Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. Per vendor docs, only CookieYes offers a free tier.
Didomi Tested: Hosted
All Didomi results
CookieYes Tested: Hosted
All CookieYes results
Which is faster, Didomi or CookieYes?
Shorter bars are better. The exception is tracker blocking, where the bar shows the share of checks passed.
| Question | Difference | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Banner appearsTime from navigation until the banner is visible on screen. Lower is better. | 4.41 s | 2.42 s | CookieYes’ banner appeared 1.99 s sooner. |
| Page slowed byExtra time before the main content paints (LCP), compared with the same page without a consent manager. | +1.28 s95% interval 1.26 s to 1.29 s | +176 ms95% interval 148 ms to 212 ms | CookieYes delayed the main content 1.10 s less. |
| Click responds inTime from pressing Accept until the screen updates. Under 200 ms feels instant. | 16 msOne visit measured | 24 msOne visit measured | About the same. They are less than 16 ms apart. |
| Blocks trackersChecks that no tracker runs, the page sets no cookie and no data leaves the page before the visitor chooses. | 4 of 4 checks passed | 3 of 4 checks passed1 could not be checked | Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. |
| Adds to pageExtra data transferred during the first load, compared with the same page without a consent manager. | +253 KB95% interval: 253 KB | +31 KB95% interval: 31 KB | CookieYes added 222 KB less to the first load. |
“About the same” means that the two results fall within each other’s spread. We measure both against the same page without a consent manager. We do not publish a direct head-to-head interval yet.
Page vitals and load times
Lab detail for engineers. All values are medians on the mobile profile. Both CMPs ran on Next.js 16.
| Metric | Didomi | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| TTFB | No measurable delaypage 5 ms | No measurable delaypage 8 ms |
| FCP | No measurable delaypage 248 ms | No measurable delaypage 264 ms |
| LCP | +1.28 spage 4.72 s | +176 mspage 3.64 s |
| CLS | No measurable shiftpage 0.00 | No measurable shiftpage 0.00 |
| Metric | Didomi | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| CMP script requested | ||
| CMP script loaded | ||
| Consent state known | ||
| Banner visible | 4.41 s | 2.42 s |
| Metric | Didomi | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| Screen responds | 16 ms | 24 ms |
| Banner gone | ||
| Consent applied | ||
| Analytics active |
Which features differ between Didomi and CookieYes?
Statuses come from each vendor’s documentation. Each status links to its source.
- Verified by test
- Per vendor docs
- Partial
- Not supported
- Unknown
| Feature | Didomi | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| Only Didomi · 1 | ||
| First-party SDKsFrameworks | React (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Script tag only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Only CookieYes · 1 | ||
| Free tierPricing | Contact sales (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | 5,000 pageviews a month (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) |
| Not confirmed for one side · 4 | ||
| IAB GPPStandards | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
| Self-hostableDeveloper | Assets through your domain (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
| Headless UIDeveloper | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
| TypeScript typesDeveloper | React SDK only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
Same on both · 11
Should you choose Didomi or CookieYes?
We built these lists from the measured and documented differences above. Neither list is a recommendation.
Choose Didomi if
- You want a first-party SDK for React
Choose CookieYes if
- You want a free tier
- A fast banner matters to you: CookieYes’ banner appeared 1.99 s sooner
- Page load time matters to you: CookieYes delayed the main content 1.10 s less
- Page weight matters to you: CookieYes added 222 KB less to the first load
What was tested?
- Deployment
- Both ran from their vendor-hosted services. Network distance to each vendor is part of the result.
Questions about Didomi and CookieYes
Answers come from the benchmark run and from each vendor’s documentation.
On the emulated mobile profile, CookieYes’ banner appeared in a median 2.42 s and Didomi’s in 4.41 s. CookieYes delayed the main content 1.10 s less.
Both document it. Statuses come from vendor docs.
Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. Each check loads the page. Then it looks for trackers that ran, cookies that the page set or data that left the page before the visitor chose.
Other comparisons
c15tvs
CookieYesc15t’s banner 2.18 s sooner · 1 standard differsc15tvs
Didomic15t’s banner 4.17 s sooner · 1 standard differsOneTrustvs
DidomiBanner times about the same · 1 framework SDK differs
CookieYesvsOneTrustCookieYes’ banner 1.50 s sooner · 1 feature differs
iubendavs
CookieYesBanner times about the same · Same documented features
Didomivs
UsercentricsBanner times about the same · 2 features differ