iubenda vs CookieYes: cookie banner speed and features compared
On emulated mobile, iubenda and CookieYes showed their banners in about the same time. The medians were 2.66 s for iubenda and 2.42 s for CookieYes. CookieYes delayed the main content 436 ms less. Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. Their documented features are the same in this comparison.
iubenda Tested: Hosted
All iubenda results
CookieYes Tested: Hosted
All CookieYes results
Which is faster, iubenda 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. | 2.66 s | 2.42 s | About the same. The gap is under 20%, within run-to-run noise. |
| Page slowed byExtra time before the main content paints (LCP), compared with the same page without a consent manager. | +612 ms95% interval 600 ms to 624 ms | +176 ms95% interval 148 ms to 212 ms | CookieYes delayed the main content 436 ms less. |
| Click responds inTime from pressing Accept until the screen updates. Under 200 ms feels instant. | 32 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. | +122 KB95% interval: 122 KB | +31 KB95% interval: 31 KB | CookieYes added 91 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 We do not publish a direct head-to-head interval yet.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 | iubenda | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| TTFB | No measurable delaypage 6 ms | No measurable delaypage 8 ms |
| FCP | No measurable delaypage 252 ms | No measurable delaypage 264 ms |
| LCP | +612 mspage 4.06 s | +176 mspage 3.64 s |
| CLS | No measurable shiftpage 0.00 | No measurable shiftpage 0.00 |
| Metric | iubenda | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| CMP script requested | ||
| CMP script loaded | ||
| Consent state known | ||
| Banner visible | 2.66 s | 2.42 s |
| Metric | iubenda | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| Screen responds | 32 ms | 24 ms |
| Banner gone | ||
| Consent applied | ||
| Analytics active |
Which features differ between iubenda 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 | iubenda | CookieYes |
|---|---|---|
| Not confirmed for one side · 3 | ||
| IAB GPPStandards | Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
| Self-hostableDeveloper | Hosted embed only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
| Headless UIDeveloper | Experimental (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab) | Unknown |
Same on both · 13
Should you choose iubenda or CookieYes?
We built these lists from the measured and documented differences above. Neither list is a recommendation.
Choose iubenda if
- Nothing measured or documented here favours iubenda. Decide on price, support and the tools that you already use
Choose CookieYes if
- Page load time matters to you: CookieYes delayed the main content 436 ms less
- Page weight matters to you: CookieYes added 91 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 iubenda and CookieYes
Answers come from the benchmark run and from each vendor’s documentation.
Not in a way this run can separate. Their banner times were about the same. The gap is under 20%, within run-to-run noise. CookieYes delayed the main content 436 ms 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
iubendac15t’s banner 2.42 s sooner · 1 standard differs
CookieYesvsOneTrustCookieYes’ banner 1.50 s sooner · 1 feature differs
Cookie Controlvs
CookieYesBanner times about the same · Same documented featuresc15tvs
OneTrustc15t’s banner 3.67 s sooner · 1 standard differs
c15tvs
Usercentricsc15t’s banner 3.92 s sooner · 1 standard differs