WebP VS PNG
The ultimate comparison guide. Understanding the technical differences between Web Picture Format and Portable Network Graphics.
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
PNG
pngLossless format supporting transparency, ideal for logos and digital art.
Pros
- Lossless quality
- Alpha channel transparency
- Wide support
Cons
- Larger file sizes than JPG
- Not good for print (RGB only)
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 PNG wins
Choose PNG when your workflow prioritizes logos or screenshots. It delivers lossless quality plus modern compression perks.
Technical Specifications
| Feature | WebP | PNG |
|---|---|---|
| MIME Type | image/webp | image/png |
| Developer | PNG Development Group | |
| Release Year | 2010 | 1996 |
| Best For | Modern websites, App assets, Speed optimization | Logos, Screenshots, Graphics with transparent backgrounds |
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 PNG deliverables without leaving their browser.
- • Reference the .webp glossary from this page.
- • Embed the conversion CTA in docs, wikis, and onboarding runbooks.
- • Use PNG for logos 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.