Format Guide
PNG vs WEBP: Which is Better?
WEBP is the modern successor to PNG for web images. But when should you stick with PNG? Here's the complete breakdown.
🖼️
Use PNG when…
- Publishing to all browsers including old IE
- Maximum color depth needed
- Working with design tools (Photoshop, Figma)
- Creating print-ready graphics
- Absolute lossless preservation required
⚡
Use WEBP when…
- Optimizing images for the web
- You want the smallest file size
- Google PageSpeed score matters
- You need transparency AND small size
- Building for modern browsers only
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Feature | PNG | WEBP |
|---|---|---|
| Compression | Lossless only | Lossy & lossless |
| File size vs JPEG | Larger than JPEG | 25–35% smaller than JPEG |
| Transparency | ✅ Full alpha channel | ✅ Full alpha channel |
| Animation | ❌ (use APNG or WebP) | ✅ Natively supported |
| Browser support | ✅ Universal (100%) | ✅ All modern browsers |
| Lossless option | ✅ Always lossless | ✅ Lossless mode available |
| IE support | ✅ Yes (IE6+) | ❌ Not supported in IE |
| Google PageSpeed | May flag PNG as too large | Recommended by Google |
| Color depth | Up to 48-bit | Up to 24-bit |
| Metadata support | Limited | EXIF/XMP/ICC supported |
The Verdict: WEBP for Web, PNG for Everything Else
For websites, WEBP is almost always the better choice. It can be both lossy and lossless, supports transparency just like PNG, and delivers 25–35% smaller files. Google explicitly recommends WEBP in its PageSpeed Insights tool.
When PNG Still Wins
PNG remains the best choice when you need raw editing compatibility — design tools like Photoshop, Figma, and Illustrator all work natively with PNG. For print workflows and archival purposes, PNG's lossless nature and full color depth make it irreplaceable. Also use PNG if you need IE11 compatibility (WEBP is unsupported in IE).