$devtoolkit.sh/compare/png-vs-webp

PNG vs WebP — Which Lossless Format is Better?

WebP was designed by Google to replace both JPEG and PNG on the web with a single modern format that offers better compression in both lossy and lossless modes. For lossless images (the use case where you would otherwise choose PNG), WebP lossless is typically 26% smaller than equivalent PNG files. The main reason PNG still dominates is historical inertia and the fact that WebP had limited browser support until 2020.

Comparison Table

AspectPNGWebP
Lossless compressionGood; mature deflate-based algorithmBetter than PNG; typically 26% smaller
Lossy compressionNot supportedExcellent; 25–34% smaller than JPEG
TransparencyFull alpha channelFull alpha channel (both lossless and lossy)
AnimationAPNG standard, not universally supportedBuilt-in animation support with full color and alpha
Browser supportUniversal; supported everywhere since the 1990sAll major browsers since 2020; no IE support
Editing tool supportAll image editors read/write PNGGrowing support; some older tools do not write WebP
Use in emailsSupported in all email clientsInconsistent email client support; PNG safer for email

When to Use PNG

PNG remains the safe choice when maximum compatibility is required — email newsletters, images embedded in documents or PDFs, and screenshots shared with users who may open them in any application. PNG is also still appropriate when the editing workflow requires it (many design tools export PNG by default) or when serving images to users on very old browsers.

When to Use WebP

WebP is the better choice for web-facing graphics in 2024 and beyond. If you are optimizing a website for Core Web Vitals and page performance, converting PNG assets to WebP is a straightforward win: the same visual quality at 26% less bandwidth. Use the HTML <picture> element with PNG fallback for the rare cases where a user might be on an older browser.

Convert Between PNG and WebP

FAQ

Does WebP actually look the same as PNG?
WebP lossless is mathematically identical to PNG in terms of output pixels — it is still lossless compression. WebP lossy introduces compression artifacts like JPEG, but they tend to be less objectionable than JPEG artifacts for the same file size.
Why is PNG still used if WebP is better?
PNG has 30+ years of universal support. Every image editor, web browser, operating system, and application handles PNG. WebP requires modern tool support. For professional image workflows involving multiple edit passes, PNG also avoids the generational quality loss that lossy WebP would introduce.
Should I use AVIF instead of WebP?
AVIF provides even better compression than WebP (especially for photographic content) and has broad browser support as of 2023. However, AVIF encoding is significantly slower than WebP. For new projects, offer AVIF with WebP fallback and PNG/JPEG as the final fallback.

Related Comparisons

/compare/png-vs-webpv1.0.0