--- title: "Osano vs CookieYes" canonical: "https://cookiebench.com/compare/osano-vs-cookieyes" last-updated: "2026-10-12" --- # Osano vs CookieYes: cookie banner speed and features On desktop, CookieYes showed its banner sooner, in a median 387 ms against 644 ms for Osano. Neither added a measurable delay. Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. Per vendor docs, only Osano offers open-source code. We measured both in the same run, in a Next.js app. We measured each against the same page without a consent manager. They also share Script tag, React, Nuxt, Astro, TanStack Start integrations. ## Which is faster on desktop? Desktop profile: 1365 × 768 · No CPU slowdown · 12.5 MB/s, no added latency. | Question | Osano | CookieYes | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | How fast does the banner appear? | 644 ms | 387 ms | CookieYes’ banner appeared 257 ms sooner. | | Does it slow the page down? | No measurable change | No measurable change | Neither added a measurable delay. | | How fast does a click respond? | 32 ms | 16 ms | CookieYes responded 16 ms sooner. Both are under 200 ms, which feels instant. | | Does it block trackers until consent? | 4 of 4 checks passed | 3 of 4 checks passed. We could not check the other 1 | Neither leaked a tracker in the checks that ran. We could not run 1 of 4 checks for CookieYes. | | How much does it add to the page? | +87 KB (95% interval 85 KB to 87 KB) | +31 KB (95% interval: 31 KB) | CookieYes added 56 KB less to the first load. | ## Which is faster on mobile? Mobile (emulated) profile: 390 × 844, DPR 3 · Mid-tier phone CPU (4× slowdown) · 200 KB/s, 150 ms latency. On emulated mobile, Osano and CookieYes showed their banners in about the same time. The medians were 2.15 s for Osano and 2.42 s for CookieYes. CookieYes delayed the main content 248 ms less. Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. CookieYes failed none. Per vendor docs, only Osano offers open-source code. | Question | Osano | CookieYes | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | How fast does the banner appear? | 2.15 s | 2.42 s | About the same. The gap is under 20%, within run-to-run noise. | | Does it slow the page down? | +424 ms (95% interval 420 ms to 428 ms) | +176 ms (95% interval 148 ms to 212 ms) | CookieYes delayed the main content 248 ms less. | | How fast does a click respond? | 128 ms | 24 ms | CookieYes responded 104 ms sooner. Both are under 200 ms, which feels instant. | | Does it block trackers until consent? | 2 of 4 checks passed. 2 failed: the accept check failed, the reject check failed | 3 of 4 checks passed. We could not check the other 1 | Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. CookieYes failed none. | | How much does it add to the page? | +85 KB (95% interval: 85 KB) | +31 KB (95% interval: 31 KB) | CookieYes added 54 KB less to the first load. | ## Which features differ? | Feature | Osano | CookieYes | | --- | --- | --- | | IAB TCF | Per vendor docs (TCF v2) | Per vendor docs (Pro and Ultimate plans) | | IAB GPP | Per vendor docs | Unknown | | Google Consent Mode v2 | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs | | Google-certified CMP | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs | | Global Privacy Control | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs (Pro and Ultimate plans) | | Geo-targeted banners | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs (Pro and Ultimate plans) | | Script blocking | Per vendor docs (Paid plans) | Per vendor docs | | Consent records | Per vendor docs (Paid plans) | Per vendor docs | | Cookie scanning | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs | | Open source | Partial (Older library only) | Not supported (Proprietary) | | Self-hostable | Not supported (Hosted script) | Unknown | | Headless UI | Unknown | Unknown | | TypeScript types | Partial (React Native SDK only) | Unknown | | Free tier | Per vendor docs (About 5,000 pageviews a month) | Per vendor docs (5,000 pageviews a month) | | Script tag | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs | | React SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | Next.js SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | Vue SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | Nuxt SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | Svelte SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | SvelteKit SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | Astro SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | | TanStack Start SDK | Not supported (Script tag only) | Not supported (Script tag only) | ## Which should you choose? ### Choose Osano if - You want open-source code ### Choose CookieYes if - A fast banner matters to you: CookieYes’ banner appeared 257 ms sooner - Page weight matters to you: CookieYes added 56 KB less to the first load ## Questions about this pair ### Is Osano slower than CookieYes? On the desktop profile, CookieYes’ banner appeared in a median 387 ms and Osano’s in 644 ms. Neither added a measurable delay. ### Do Osano and CookieYes both support IAB TCF? Both document it. Statuses come from vendor docs. ### Do Osano and CookieYes block trackers before consent? 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. ## Related comparisons - [c15t vs CookieYes](https://cookiebench.com/compare/c15t-vs-cookieyes.md) - [c15t vs Osano](https://cookiebench.com/compare/c15t-vs-osano.md) - [CookieYes vs OneTrust](https://cookiebench.com/compare/cookieyes-vs-onetrust.md) - [Osano vs OneTrust](https://cookiebench.com/compare/osano-vs-onetrust.md) - [iubenda vs CookieYes](https://cookiebench.com/compare/iubenda-vs-cookieyes.md) - [Cookie Control vs CookieYes](https://cookiebench.com/compare/cookie-control-vs-cookieyes.md) Run `matrix-2026-10-12`, published 2026-10-12. Methodology [cookiebench-v3.2.4](https://cookiebench.com/methodology). inth, the team behind c15t, maintains CookieBench. c15t is one of the consent managers we measure ([disclosure](https://cookiebench.com/methodology)). Feature support comes from vendor documentation unless a row says "Verified by test".