Master the evolving landscape of web imagery with this concise guide comparing JPG, PNG, WebP, and AVIF. Learn how to choose formats and tools that improve load times, Core Web Vitals, and SEO while preserving visual fidelity. **Estimated reading time: ≤7 minutes**

Key Takeaways

- WebP and AVIF reduce file sizes 25–50% vs. legacy formats, improving load times and Core Web Vitals. - WebP has near-universal support; AVIF adoption is rapidly increasing—use progressive enhancement to serve both. - Use the HTML `

## Table of Contents ## Introduction / Overview Images are often the heaviest assets on a page; choosing the right format and compression strategy is a decisive factor in page speed, SEO, and user experience. This guide summarizes the technical trade-offs of common formats, outlines browser compatibility in 2026, and recommends tools and workflows for production-grade image optimization. ## Why Image Compression Matters - Faster load times: Images commonly account for the majority of page weight; reducing their size shortens load time and lowers bandwidth. - SEO and Core Web Vitals: Efficient images improve Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) and indirectly benefit Interaction to Next Paint (INP) and Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS). - Cost and accessibility: Smaller images reduce hosting and delivery costs and improve the experience for users on limited connections or devices. - Visual quality and brand integrity: Correct formats preserve color fidelity, transparency, and edge sharpness where required. ## Image Format Comparison: JPG, PNG, WebP, and AVIF Understanding formats by capability helps you choose the right one for each use case. - JPG / JPEG - Type: Lossy - Strengths: Universal support; efficient for complex photographs. - Weaknesses: No transparency; artifacts at high compression; quality degrades on repeated saves. - Best for: Photographs where file size is more important than pixel-perfect fidelity. - PNG - Type: Lossless (PNG-8 / PNG-24 variants) - Strengths: Exact fidelity; full alpha transparency; ideal for logos, icons, screenshots, and text-heavy images. - Weaknesses: Large file sizes for photographic content. - Best for: Branding assets and UI elements where precision matters. - WebP - Type: Lossy and lossless, supports alpha and animation - Strengths: 25–35% smaller than JPEG/PNG at comparable perceptual quality; mature tooling and broad browser support. - Weaknesses: Slightly higher CPU cost for encoding/decoding; older editing software may require plugins. - Best for: General-purpose web images—photos and graphics—where wide compatibility and good compression are desired. - AVIF - Type: Lossy and lossless, supports alpha, animation, HDR, and wide color gamut - Strengths: Superior compression efficiency—often 10–20% smaller than WebP and up to ~50% vs. JPEG; excellent color fidelity and HDR support. - Weaknesses: Higher encoding/decoding cost; tooling and legacy support still catching up. - Best for: Performance-critical, high-fidelity assets (hero images, e-commerce galleries) where processing costs are justified. Summary guidance: - Use AVIF for the highest compression and quality when you can control encoding and have a fallback strategy. - Use WebP for broad, low-friction gains. - Preserve PNG for pixel-perfect transparency and JPEG as a guaranteed fallback. Sources: [Google Developers](https://developers.google.com/speed/webp), [MDN Web Docs](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Media/Formats/Image_types#avif) ## Browser Support and Delivery Strategy By 2026: - WebP: effectively universal across major browsers. - AVIF: broadly supported in Chromium-based browsers, Firefox, and increasingly in Safari; some older or niche browsers may lack support. Use progressive enhancement via the `