--- title: "Osano vs Usercentrics" canonical: "https://cookiebench.com/compare/osano-vs-usercentrics" last-updated: "2026-10-12" --- # Osano vs Usercentrics: cookie banner speed and features On desktop, Osano and Usercentrics showed their banners in about the same time. The medians were 644 ms for Osano and 672 ms for Usercentrics. Neither added a measurable delay. Both held trackers back in every check. 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 | Usercentrics | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | How fast does the banner appear? | 644 ms | 672 ms | About the same. The gap is under 20%, within run-to-run noise. | | 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 | Usercentrics responded 16 ms sooner. Both are under 200 ms, which feels instant. | | Does it block trackers until consent? | 4 of 4 checks passed | 4 of 4 checks passed | Both held trackers back in every check. | | How much does it add to the page? | +87 KB (95% interval 85 KB to 87 KB) | +164 KB (95% interval: 164 KB) | Osano added 77 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 showed its banner sooner, in a median 2.15 s against 4.16 s for Usercentrics. Osano delayed the main content 420 ms less. Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. Usercentrics failed none. Per vendor docs, only Osano offers open-source code. | Question | Osano | Usercentrics | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | How fast does the banner appear? | 2.15 s | 4.16 s | Osano’s banner appeared 2.01 s sooner. | | Does it slow the page down? | +424 ms (95% interval 420 ms to 428 ms) | +844 ms (95% interval 836 ms to 864 ms) | Osano delayed the main content 420 ms less. | | How fast does a click respond? | 128 ms | Not measured (The click worked, but the browser reported no timing for it. That is not zero, and not proof it took under 16 ms) | No comparison. Usercentrics has no result here, so we call neither one better. | | Does it block trackers until consent? | 2 of 4 checks passed. 2 failed: the accept check failed, the reject check failed | 4 of 4 checks passed | Osano failed 2 of 4 checks: the accept check failed and the reject check failed. Usercentrics failed none. | | How much does it add to the page? | +85 KB (95% interval: 85 KB) | +164 KB (95% interval: 164 KB) | Osano added 79 KB less to the first load. | ## Which features differ? | Feature | Osano | Usercentrics | | --- | --- | --- | | IAB TCF | Per vendor docs (TCF v2) | Per vendor docs (Pro plan and up) | | IAB GPP | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs (v3 script tag) | | 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 | | Geo-targeted banners | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs (Plus plan and up) | | Script blocking | Per vendor docs (Paid plans) | Per vendor docs (Paid plans) | | Consent records | Per vendor docs (Paid plans) | Per vendor docs (Kept 12 months) | | Cookie scanning | Per vendor docs | Per vendor docs | | Open source | Partial (Older library only) | Not supported (Commercial licence) | | Self-hostable | Not supported (Hosted script) | Not supported (Hosted backend) | | Headless UI | Unknown | Per vendor docs | | TypeScript types | Partial (React Native SDK only) | Per vendor docs | | Free tier | Per vendor docs (About 5,000 pageviews a month) | Per vendor docs (1,000 sessions 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 - Page weight matters to you: Osano added 77 KB less to the first load ### Choose Usercentrics if - Nothing measured or documented here favours Usercentrics. Decide on price, support and the tools that you already use ## Questions about this pair ### Is Osano faster than Usercentrics? 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. Neither added a measurable delay. ### Do Osano and Usercentrics both support IAB TCF? Both document it. Statuses come from vendor docs. ### Do Osano and Usercentrics block trackers before consent? Both held trackers back in every check. 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 Usercentrics](https://cookiebench.com/compare/c15t-vs-usercentrics.md) - [c15t vs Osano](https://cookiebench.com/compare/c15t-vs-osano.md) - [OneTrust vs Usercentrics](https://cookiebench.com/compare/onetrust-vs-usercentrics.md) - [Osano vs OneTrust](https://cookiebench.com/compare/osano-vs-onetrust.md) - [Didomi vs Usercentrics](https://cookiebench.com/compare/didomi-vs-usercentrics.md) - [c15t vs OneTrust](https://cookiebench.com/compare/c15t-vs-onetrust.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".