WebP VS AVIF
The ultimate comparison guide. Understanding the technical differences between Web Picture Format and AV1 Image File Format.
WebP
webpModern format providing superior compression for web performance.
Pros
- Superior compression (30% smaller than JPG)
- Supports transparency
- Supports animation
Cons
- Not supported by very old browsers
- Complex encoding
AVIF
avifNext-gen compression codec derived from AV1 video, offering the best quality-to-size ratio.
Pros
- Best-in-class compression
- HDR support
- 10-bit color depth
Cons
- Slow encoding speed
- Limited software support outside browsers
When WebP wins
Stay with WebP when you need modern websites or app assets. Its strengths center on superior compression (30% smaller than jpg) and a feature set native to Google.
When AVIF wins
Choose AVIF when your workflow prioritizes next-gen web delivery or high-quality streaming assets. It delivers best-in-class compression plus modern compression perks.
Technical Specifications
| Feature | WebP | AVIF |
|---|---|---|
| MIME Type | image/webp | image/avif |
| Developer | Alliance for Open Media | |
| Release Year | 2010 | 2019 |
| Best For | Modern websites, App assets, Speed optimization | Next-gen web delivery, High-quality streaming assets |
Need to switch?
Where WebP still wins
Keep WebP when you need superior compression (30% smaller than jpg) and workflows depend on modern websites / app assets. Link those teams directly to the converter above so they can ship AVIF deliverables without leaving their browser.
- • Reference the .webp glossary from this page.
- • Embed the conversion CTA in docs, wikis, and onboarding runbooks.
- • Use AVIF for next-gen web delivery while archiving originals as WebP.
Keep crawlers in the conversion hub
Link this comparison to the relevant tool, glossary, and documentation pages so every crawl discovers a monetizable route.