WebP vs AVIF: Which Image Format is Best for Your Website?

If you have looked at PageSpeed Insights recently or read anything about image optimization, you have almost certainly come across two format names: WebP and AVIF. Both are described as “next-gen” formats that compress better than JPEG and PNG. Both are worth using. But they are not interchangeable, and choosing the wrong one for your audience can cause compatibility problems.

This guide gives you a plain comparison so you can make a decision based on your specific situation.

The short version

Use WebP if you want broad compatibility without worrying about browser support. It is well-supported across all modern browsers and will compress your images 25 to 35 percent better than JPEG.

Use AVIF if your audience is primarily on modern browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Edge, or recent Safari) and you want the best possible compression. AVIF can reduce file sizes by 50 percent or more compared to JPEG, which matters on large hero images and product photography.

What is WebP?

WebP was developed by Google, released in 2010, and reached broad browser support around 2020. It uses a compression algorithm derived from the VP8 video codec, which means it handles photographic content very well.

Key facts about WebP:

Supported in Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Safari (since version 14), and all major mobile browsers.
Supports transparency (alpha channel), so it can replace PNG files in most cases.
Supports animation, so it can replace animated GIFs.
Produces files roughly 25 to 35 percent smaller than JPEG at the same perceived quality.
Lossy and lossless modes are both available.

WebP is a safe default for nearly every website right now.

What is AVIF?

AVIF is a newer format based on the AV1 video codec. It was finalised as a standard in 2019 and browser support has grown steadily since. It compresses images more aggressively than WebP, particularly for photographs and images with smooth gradients.

Key facts about AVIF:

Supported in Chrome (version 85+), Firefox (version 93+), Edge (version 121+), and Safari (version 16.4+).
Supports transparency and wide colour gamut.
Does not support animation.
Produces files roughly 45 to 55 percent smaller than JPEG at comparable quality.
Slower to encode than WebP or JPEG, which can slow down batch processing on older hardware.

AVIF’s main limitation is encoder performance. On large batches of high-resolution images, conversion takes noticeably longer than WebP. When using Pixscaler, you may find AVIF compression takes a few extra seconds per file compared to WebP.

Side-by-side comparison

Feature	JPEG	WebP	AVIF
File size (vs JPEG)	baseline	25–35% smaller	45–55% smaller
Transparency support	No	Yes	Yes
Animation support	No	Yes	No
Lossy compression	Yes	Yes	Yes
Lossless compression	Yes	Yes	Yes
Browser support	Universal	Universal (modern)	Strong (modern)
Encoding speed	Fast	Fast	Slower

When to use WebP

Use WebP when:

You need a safe default with no compatibility risk.
You are serving images to a broad audience that may include older browsers.
You need animated images and want to replace GIFs.
You need to convert PNGs with transparency.
You want fast local compression on large batches.

When to use AVIF

Use AVIF when:

Your analytics show that most users are on Chrome, Firefox, Edge, or recent Safari.
You are working with large hero images or full-width photography where file size is a major factor.
You want the smallest possible files for mobile performance.
You are not working with animated images.

A practical approach for most websites

For most small to mid-size websites, the following works well:

Convert all JPEG photographs to WebP. Use Pixscaler’s batch workspace to process multiple images at once.
Convert any PNGs with transparency to WebP.
For key images where you want maximum performance (like the hero banner on a landing page), test the AVIF version and check the visual quality. If it looks good, use AVIF for those specific images.

You do not have to pick one format for the entire site. It is reasonable to use WebP as the default and AVIF for the handful of images where the extra size savings matter most.

What about PNG and JPEG?

PNG remains the right choice for:

Screenshots with text and sharp edges (JPEG and WebP introduce visible artefacts at these edges).
Icons and diagrams with large flat areas of colour.
Images that need absolute pixel-perfect accuracy (though this is rare in practice).

JPEG remains the right choice for:

When you are sending images to someone who specifically requires JPEG (many government portals, email clients, and legacy systems).
Exporting to a context where you are not sure what format support is available.

How to convert

Open Pixscaler, drop your images, and select your format from the dropdown. The tool runs the compression locally in your browser and shows you the before and after file size for each image. Nothing is uploaded to a server.

For specific platforms, the preset pages pre-configure the right format and dimensions automatically.

FAQ

Can I use both WebP and AVIF on the same page?

Yes. Use the HTML <picture> element to provide both options and let the browser pick the best one it supports:

<picture>
  <source srcset="image.avif" type="image/avif" />
  <source srcset="image.webp" type="image/webp" />
  <img src="image.jpg" alt="Description of the image" />
</picture>

Will converting to WebP or AVIF make my images look worse?

At a quality setting of 75 to 85 percent, the visual difference from the original JPEG is not noticeable to most people at normal viewing sizes. If you look closely at very fine texture detail (like fabric or hair), you may see minor differences. For web use, these settings are a good balance.

Is AVIF safe to use in 2026?

Yes, for most modern web audiences. If your Google Analytics or similar tool shows that the majority of your users are on recent Chrome, Firefox, or Safari, AVIF is a solid choice. If you serve a significant percentage of users on older Android browsers or legacy environments, stay with WebP.