Skip to main content

Osano vs OneTrust: cookie banner speed and features compared

Results for

On emulated mobile, Osano showed its banner sooner, in a median 2.15 s against 3.92 s for OneTrust. Osano delayed the main content 52 ms less. Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. OneTrust failed none. Per vendor docs, only Osano offers open-source code and a free tier. Per vendor docs, only OneTrust offers self-hosting.

OsanoOsano

Osano Tested: Hosted
All Osano results

OneTrustOneTrust

OneTrust Tested: Hosted
All OneTrust results

Which is faster, Osano or OneTrust?

Shorter bars are better. The exception is tracker blocking, where the bar shows the share of checks passed.

Osano and OneTrust on the mobile (emulated) profile, Next.js 16
QuestionOsanoOneTrustDifference
Banner appearsTime from navigation until the banner is visible on screen. Lower is better.
2.15 sFast
3.92 sModerate

Osano’s banner appeared 1.76 s sooner.

Page slowed byExtra time before the main content paints (LCP), compared with the same page without a consent manager.
+424 ms95% interval 420 ms to 428 msSmall
+476 ms95% interval 444 ms to 508 msSmall

Osano delayed the main content 52 ms less.

Click responds inTime from pressing Accept until the screen updates. Under 200 ms feels instant.
128 msOne visit measuredFast
16 msOne visit measuredFast

OneTrust responded 112 ms sooner. Both are under 200 ms, which feels instant.

Blocks trackersChecks that no tracker runs, the page sets no cookie and no data leaves the page before the visitor chooses.
2 of 4 checks passed2 failed: the accept check failed, the reject check failedLeaked
4 of 4 checks passedBlocked

Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. OneTrust failed none.

Adds to pageExtra data transferred during the first load, compared with the same page without a consent manager.
+85 KB95% interval: 85 KBLight
+211 KB95% interval: 211 KBModerate

Osano added 126 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 We do not publish a direct head-to-head interval yet.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.

Page vitalsChange against the same page without a consent manager.
MetricOsanoOneTrust
TTFBNo measurable delaypage 5 msNo measurable delaypage 6 ms
FCPNo measurable delaypage 248 msNo measurable delaypage 248 ms
LCP+424 mspage 3.87 s+476 mspage 3.93 s
CLSNo measurable shiftpage 0.00No measurable shiftpage 0.00
Load timesMilliseconds from navigation.
MetricOsanoOneTrust
CMP script requested
CMP script loaded
Consent state known
Banner visible2.15 s3.92 s
After AcceptMilliseconds from the click.
MetricOsanoOneTrust
Screen responds128 ms16 ms
Banner gone
Consent applied
Analytics active

Which features differ between Osano and OneTrust?

Statuses come from each vendor’s documentation. Each status links to its source.

  • Verified by test
  • Per vendor docs
  • Partial
  • Not supported
  • Unknown
Features that differ between Osano and OneTrust, from vendor docs
FeatureOsanoOneTrust
Only Osano · 2
Open sourceDeveloperOlder library only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Proprietary (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Free tierPricingAbout 5,000 pageviews a month (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Quote-based pricing (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Only OneTrust · 1
Self-hostableDeveloperHosted script (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Script only; hosted backend (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Not confirmed for one side · 2
Headless UIDeveloperUnknownMobile and CTV only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
TypeScript typesDeveloperReact Native SDK only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Unknown
Same on both · 11
Features with the same status for Osano and OneTrust
FeatureOsanoOneTrust
IAB TCFStandardsTCF v2 (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)TCF v2.2 and v2.3 (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
IAB GPPStandardsPer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Google Consent Mode v2StandardsPer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Google-certified CMPStandardsPer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Global Privacy ControlStandardsPer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Geo-targeted bannersCompliancePer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Script blockingCompliancePaid plans (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Consent recordsCompliancePaid plans (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Cookie scanningCompliancePer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
Script tagFrameworksPer vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Per vendor docs (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)
First-party SDKsReact, Next.js, Vue, Nuxt, Svelte, SvelteKit, Astro, TanStack StartScript tag only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)Script tag only (vendor documentation, opens in a new tab)

Should you choose Osano or OneTrust?

We built these lists from the measured and documented differences above. Neither list is a recommendation.

Choose Osano if

  • You want open-source code and a free tier
  • A fast banner matters to you: Osano’s banner appeared 1.76 s sooner
  • Page load time matters to you: Osano delayed the main content 52 ms less
  • Page weight matters to you: Osano added 126 KB less to the first load

Choose OneTrust if

  • You want self-hosting
  • You want the one that failed fewer tracker-blocking checks in this run

What was tested?

Deployment
Both ran from their vendor-hosted services. Network distance to each vendor is part of the result.

How we test: methodology cookiebench-v3.2.4

Questions about Osano and OneTrust

Answers come from the benchmark run and from each vendor’s documentation.

On the emulated mobile profile, Osano’s banner appeared in a median 2.15 s and OneTrust’s in 3.92 s. Osano delayed the main content 52 ms less.